Legal Opinion · Dissent

Ercolani v. Commonwealth

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 7, 2007Published

1Dissent

DISSENTING OPINION BY

Judge FRIEDMAN.

I respectfully dissent. The majority holds that the Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County (trial court) erred in allowing Gregory C. Ercolani’s nunc pro tune appeal. As a result, the majority does not address whether the trial court erred in concluding that the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Transportation, Bureau of Driver Licensing (DOT) failed to meet its burden of proving that Ercolani refused to submit to a blood test. For the reasons that follow, I cannot agree that the trial court erred in allowing Ercolani’s nunc pro tunc appeal or…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Buehler v. United States Fashion Plate Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
  2. Todd v. COM., DEPT. OF TRANSP.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
  3. Bureau of Traffic Safety v. QuinlanCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
  4. Pappas v. Commonwealth, Department of TransportationCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
  5. COM., DEPT. OF TRANSP. v. GrasseCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1992

7 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