Legal Opinion

Pennsylvania ex rel. George v. Commonwealth

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided August 30, 2000PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

NIGRO, Justice.

The issue before this Court is whether the Commonwealth Court erred in sustaining preliminary objections to Appellants’ claim that the legislative process used in enacting Senate Bill No. 801 (S.B.801), which ultimately became Act 57 of 1996, violated Article III, Section 5 of the Pennsylvania Constitution. We agree with Appellants that the Commonwealth Court erred in sustaining preliminary objections as to this issue. However, after reviewing the underlying constitutional issue on the merits, as warranted by the circumstances of this case, we conclude that Article III,…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Consumer Party of Pennsylvania v. Com.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
  2. United States v. BallinSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
  3. Commonwealth v. SpotzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
  4. Sweeney v. TuckerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
  5. Bower v. BowerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1992

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

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. City of Philadelphia v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
  2. Pennsylvanians Against Gambling Expansion Fund, Inc. v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
  3. Stilp v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
  4. Jubelirer v. RendellSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2008
  5. Uniontown Newspapers, Inc. v. RobertsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2003

19 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