Legal Opinion
COM. DEPT. OF TRANSP. v. Clayton
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided November 1, 1996PublishedCited by 36 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
CAPPY, Justice.
The instant appeal presents us with the issue of whether a regulation which provides for the revocation of one’s operating privilege for a period of one year upon the occurrence of only a single epileptic seizure, without the licensee having an opportunity to present medical evidence in an effort to establish his or her competency to drive, violates due process. Both the trial court and the Commonwealth Court have ruled that the regulation at issue here is violative of due process. For the reasons that follow, we affirm that conclusion.
The facts giving rise…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Stanley v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Dandridge v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Weinberger v. SalfiSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Bell v. BursonSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Cleveland Board of Education v. LaFleurSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by36 opinions
- Commonwealth v. TurnerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
- Commonwealth v. Batts, Q., Aplt.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2017
- Com., Dept. of Transp. v. McCaffertySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
- In the Interest of J.B.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
- Procito v. Unemployment Compensation Board of ReviewCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2008
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.