Legal Opinion · Dissent

Commonwealth, Department of Transportation v. Samek

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 14, 1983No. Appeal No. 2584 C.D. 1980PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Dissent

Dissenting Opinion by

Judge Blatt :

Respectfully, I must dissent.

It is clear that the Department of Transportation (Department) had actual notice, actual knowledge of the hearing scheduled for October 9, for it was a Department attorney who was present at the September *2134 hearing and who requested the continuance. And, although I do not approve of the conduct of counsel for the motorist in failing to send notice of the appeal to the Department, his failure is rendered harmless by the Department’s having actually known of the October 9 hearing and having had a full 30 days to prepare a case.

I…

2Cited by1 opinion

  1. Commonwealth, Department of Transportation v. SamekCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1983

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

Powered by the Exa API