Legal Opinion
Dorris v. Lloyd (No. 1)
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided November 24, 1953No. 1; Appeal, 263PublishedCited by 36 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Chief Justice Horace Stern,
The court below correctly decided that plaintiff had no legal standing to institute these proceedings.
The action is one of mandamus. Plaintiff, Dr. John L. Dorris, filed a complaint in his capacity as County Chairman of the Democratic Party, but averred that he was proceeding also on behalf of the Democratic candidates who ran for office on the Democratic ticket *476in 1952, State and National, and by and on behalf of the Democratic candidates who will aspire for office on the Democratic ticket in 1953, State and Local, and by and on behalf of the…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Commonwealth ex rel. Attorney General v. MathuesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1904
- Commonwealth ex rel. Snyder v. MitchellSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1876
- Stegmaier v. JonesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1902
- State ex rel. Hawes v. BrewerWashington Supreme Court · 1905
- Heffner v. Commonwealth ex rel. KlineSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1857
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by36 opinions
- Wm. Penn Parking Garage, Inc. v. City of PittsburghSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
- Dombrowski v. PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1968
- Mayer v. HemphillSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
- Allen v. ColauttiCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
- Lakeland Joint School District Authority v. Scott Township School DistrictSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1964
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.