Legal Opinion

Skok v. Hoch

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 17, 1971No. 104 C. D. 1971PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Judge Crumlish, Jr.,

Plaintiffs matriculated at Bloomsburg State College and were dismissed. Seeking to remedy the alleged injustice, they erroneously filed a Complaint in Mandamus naming the Vice President and Dean as a party defendant.

Lest plaintiffs are unmindful of hornbook law, we repeat: “ ‘Mandamus is an extraordinary writ which lies to compel the performance of a ministerial act or mandatory duty where there is a clear legal right in the plaintiff, a corresponding duty in the defendant, and a want of any other appropriate and adequate remedy. Borough of Easton v. Lehigh…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Travis v. TeterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1952
  2. Verratti v. Ridley TownshipSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1965
  3. Goodman Et Ux. v. MeadeSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1948
  4. Boslover Ahavas Achim Belzer Ass'n v. Philadelphia Redevelopment AuthoritySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1967
  5. Borough of Easton v. Lehigh Water Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1881

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Porter v. Bloomsburg State CollegeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
  2. VENNERI v. COUNTY OF ALLEGHENYCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1972
  3. KREMER v. SHOYERSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
  4. Fraternal Order of Police v. ShappCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
  5. Hazel v. D'IorioCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1981

3 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