Legal Opinion
In RE NOMINATION OF deYOUNG
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided August 21, 2006No. 55 MAP 2006PublishedCited by 41 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
2Per curiam
AND NOW, this 25th day of April, 2006, we REVERSE the Order of the Commonwealth Court and REMAND to the Commonwealth Court for a decision on the merits on Appellee Harry M. Riley’s Petition to Set Aside Nomination Petition. Said decision to be rendered within seven (7) days of the date of this Order. A qualified private party has a right to object to a Statement of Financial Interests attached to a Nomination Petition, therefore Appellee has standing to object in this matter. Cf In re Nomination Petition Bryant, 578 Pa. 421, 852 A.2d 1193 (2004); In re Petition of Cioppa, 533 Pa. 564,…
3Cases cited15 opinions
- Hertzberg v. Zoning Board of AdjustmentSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
- In Re HicksonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
- Payne v. Commonwealth Department of CorrectionsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
- Baranyai v. AndrezjwskiSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
- Strank v. Mercy Hospital of JohnstownSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1954
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by41 opinions
- Rendell v. Pennsylvania State Ethics CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
- In Re Nomination of PaulmierSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
- Estate of BrownSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2011
- Lukes v. Department of Public WelfareCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
- Deutsche Bank National Trust Co. v. JohnstonNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2016
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.