Commonwealth ex rel. Pappert v. Coy

861 A.2d 259, 580 Pa. 355, 2004 Pa. LEXIS 3342
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided October 15, 2004·No. Appeal No. 171 MAP 2004·Published

Opinion

[356]*356 ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 15th day of October, 2004, this Court having determined that the ripeness doctrine is not an impediment to further proceedings in the present matter, the order of dismissal entered by the Commonwealth Court is REVERSED, and the matter is remanded for further proceedings. See generally City Council of Phila. v. Commonwealth, 806 A.2d 975, 978-80 (Pa.Cmwlth.2002) (discussing the doctrine of ripeness), vacated, and remanded on ripeness grounds, 577 Pa. 518, 847 A.2d 55 (2004).

Appellant’s request for oral argument is denied, and jurisdiction is relinquished.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Commonwealth ex rel. Pappert v. Coy, 861 A.2d 259, 580 Pa. 355, 2004 Pa. LEXIS 3342 (Pa. 2004).

861 A.2d 259 (Commonwealth ex rel. Pappert v. Coy) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

City Council of Philadelphia v. Commonwealth
806 A.2d 975 (Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 2002)