Sammons v. CIVIL SERVICE COM'N OF PHILA.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
2Per curiam
The Court being equally divided, the Order of the Commonwealth Court is affirmed.
Chief Justice FLAHERTY, Justice ZAPPALA, and Justice NEWMAN would dismiss the appeal as having been improvidently granted. Justice CAPPY files an Opinion in Support of Reversal in which Justice CASTILLE and NIGRO join.
OPINION IN SUPPORT OF REVERSAL
CAPPY, Justice.
This court is equally divided and affirms, per curiam, the order of the Commonwealth Court. I respectfully disagree with the published decision of the Commonwealth Court and write separately to express my views in support of reversal. In sum, I…
3Cases cited4 opinions
- Wiegand v. WiegandSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
- Fisher v. BrickSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1947
- Com., Dept. of Transp. v. BorosSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
- Sammons v. Civil Service Commission of City of PhiladelphiaCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
4Cited by10 opinions
- Cohen v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
- Gunter v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
- City of Philadelphia v. Civil Service CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
- Gunter v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
- Cohen v. Workers' Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.