Legal Opinion
In Re Nomination Petition of Farnese
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided March 29, 2011No. 13 EAP 2008PublishedCited by 34 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
Chief Justice CASTILLE.
Appellants are unsuccessful objectors to the nomination petition of a candidate for office, who appeal the Commonwealth Court’s decision to award costs of litigation to the candidate pursuant to Section 977 of the Election Code (“Section 977” or “cost-allocation provision”).1 For the reasons that follow, we reverse.
On February 11, 2008, Lawrence M. Farnese, Jr., (“candidate”) filed with the Secretary of the Commonwealth a petition for participation in the April 2008 primary election to secure the Democratic Party nomination for the office of Senator in the…
2Cases cited31 opinions
- Neitzke v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Harper v. Virginia Board of ElectionsSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Bullock v. CarterSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Lubin v. PanishSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- P.J.S. v. Pennsylvania State Ethics CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by34 opinions
- Constitution Party of Pennsylv v. Carol AicheleCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2014
- Commonwealth v. HainesworthSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
- Grossi v. Travelers Personal Insurance Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
- Commonwealth v. WilsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
- Tech One Associates v. Board of Property Assessment, Appeals & ReviewSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.