Conrad v. Commonwealth, Department of Transportation, Bureau of Driver Licensing
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION BY Senior Judge
FLAHERTY.
This case raises the question of whether Scott E. Conrad (Conrad) is required to comply with the requirements of the Pennsylvania Ignition Interlock Law (Law), 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 7001-7003, as a con dition to the restoration of his operating privilege following his service of a one-year suspension of his operating privilege that had been imposed by the Department of Transportation, Bureau of Driver Licensing (Department), in conformity with the requirements of 75 Pa.C.S. § 1532(b)(3), as a consequence of Conrad’s conviction for violating 75 Pa.C.S. § 3731(a)…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Commonwealth v. MockaitisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
- Schneider v. Commonwealth, Department of TransportationCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
- Goppelt v. City of Philadelphia Revenue DepartmentCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2004
- Watterson v. Commonwealth, Department of Transportation, Bureau of Driver LicensingCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
- Commonwealth v. YarbinitzCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- McGrory v. COM., DEPT. OF TRANSP.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
- McGrory v. Commonwealth, Department of Transportation, Bureau of Driver LicensingSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
- McGrory v. COM., DEPT. OF TRANSP.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2007