Commonwealth v. All that Certain Lot or Parcel of Land Located at 605 University Drive
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
1Dissent
DISSENTING OPINION BY
Judge McGINLEY.
I dissent to the Plurality’s conclusion that the Rules of Civil Procedure, including Summary Judgment, are not available in a civil forfeiture proceeding under the Forfeiture Act, 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 6801-6802. I object to the Plurality’s decision to overrule two decades of case law1 without fully considering the implications of its ruling.2
*1056First, I do not agree that the language of the statute mandates a hearing even when there is no disputed issue of material fact. Although the Forfeiture Act mandates that a party receive an opportunity to be heard the…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Washington v. BaxterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
- Washington v. BaxterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
- In Re Appeal of Borough of ChurchillSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
- United States v. $133,420.00 in United States CurrencyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
- Commonwealth v. LandySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.