Estate of Cascardo

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Estate of Cascardo

861 A.2d 884, 580 Pa. 380, 2004 Pa. LEXIS 2706

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided November 10, 2004·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinions

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 10th day of November, 2004, the Petition for Alowance of Appeal is hereby GRANTED, the order of the Superior Court is VACATED, and this case REMANDED. As petitioners’ challenge was confined to the application of this statute, and not its facial constitutionality, the Attorney General did not need to be notified. See Kepple v. Fairman Drilling Co., 532 Pa. 304, 615 A.2d 1298 (1992). This case is therefore remanded for the [885] Superior Court to review the merits of this issue. Jurisdiction relinquished.

Justice SAYLOR files a Dissenting Statement.

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 10th day of November, 2004, the Petition for Alowance of Appeal is hereby GRANTED, the order of the Superior Court is VACATED, and this case REMANDED. As petitioners’ challenge was confined to the application of this statute, and not its facial constitutionality, the Attorney General did not need to be notified. See Kepple v. Fairman Drilling Co., 532 Pa. 304, 615 A.2d 1298 (1992). This case is therefore remanded for the [885] Superior Court to review the merits of this issue. Jurisdiction relinquished.

Justice SAYLOR files a Dissenting Statement.

Estate of Cascardo, 861 A.2d 884, 580 Pa. 380, 2004 Pa. LEXIS 2706 (Pa. 2004).

Pincite

861 A.2d 884 (Estate of Cascardo) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinions

Related