Curley v. Wetzel

82 A.3d 418, 623 Pa. 226, 2013 Pa. LEXIS 3014
CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedDecember 17, 2013
StatusPublished
Cited by16 cases

This text of 82 A.3d 418 (Curley v. Wetzel) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Curley v. Wetzel, 82 A.3d 418, 623 Pa. 226, 2013 Pa. LEXIS 3014 (Pa. 2013).

Opinions

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 17th day of December, 2013, the Order of the Commonwealth Court is AFFIRMED. By this Order, this Court does not embrace the Commonwealth Court’s view that this action sounds in mandamus or that a six-month statute of limitations applies to actions in mandamus in this context.

Chief Justice CASTILLE files a Concurring Statement in which Justice EAKIN joins.

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

Related

W.E. Mitwalli v. PA DOC
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 2024
R. Young, Jr. v. PA DOC & Lancaster County Clerk of Courts
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 2016
J.A. Bahret v. PSP
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 2016
Dougherty v. Pa. State Police of Pa.
138 A.3d 152 (Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 2016)
K. Roberto v. PSP
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 2016
B.J. Snow v. PSP
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 2016
K. Dodgson v. PSP
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 2016
A.W. McElyea v. PSP
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 2016
J. Taylor v. The PSP of the Commonwealth of PA
132 A.3d 590 (Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 2016)
Commonwealth, Aplt. v. Dunnavant, G.
107 A.3d 29 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 2014)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
82 A.3d 418, 623 Pa. 226, 2013 Pa. LEXIS 3014, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/curley-v-wetzel-pa-2013.