Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Miles v. Beard

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 12, 2004Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

*167CONCURRING AND DISSENTING OPINION BY

Judge FRIEDMAN.

I agree with the majority that the Court of Common Pleas of Somerset County (trial court) erred in dismissing the complaint filed by Mickey Miles (Miles) against Jeffrey A. Beard, Ph.D., (Beard) Secretary of Corrections, Department of Corrections (Department), individually and in his respective official capacity, and the other Respondents, on grounds that Miles failed to exhaust his administrative remedies or that Miles fails to state a cause of action in his complaint. However, I do not agree that the trial court erred in concluding that…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Cry, Inc. v. Mill Service, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
  2. Balshy v. RankSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  3. Fawber v. CohenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  4. Gossman v. Lower Chanceford Township Board of SupervisorsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
  5. Stackhouse v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2003

3 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