Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Scarnati, J.,et al, Aplts. v. Wolf, T.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 22, 2017No. 3 MAP 2016Published

1ConcurrenceChief Justice Saylor

I agree with the majority that the governor’s veto attempt failed. I also join the majority opinion except for its conclusion that both chambers of the General Assembly must be adjourned to prevent return of a bill to the originating house, thereby triggering the file-and-proclaim procedure.

Sound logic dictates that it is only the adjournment of the originating chamber that can prevent the Governor from returning the bill to that chamber. Accord In re ‘An Act to Amend an Act Entitled ‘An Act Concerning Pub. Utils.’’, 84 A. 706, 710 (N.J. 1912) (noting that “it is the adjournment of the house…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. NovakSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1959
  2. In Re FioriSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
  3. Hunt v. Pennsylvania State Police of Com.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
  4. In re Attorney-GeneralSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1912
  5. Opinion of the Justices of the Supreme CourtSupreme Court of Delaware · 1961

1 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