Kneller, D. v. Stewart, M.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Kneller, D. v. Stewart, M.

118 A.3d 1106, 632 Pa. 173, 2015 Pa. LEXIS 1458

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided July 8, 2015·No. 63 MM 2015·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 8th day of July, 2015, as Petitioner may pursue redress in a civil action, mandamus relief is not available. See Relosky v. Sacco, 514 Pa. 339, 523 A.2d 1112 (1987) (holding that a petitioner may not obtain mandamus relief unless he establishes the absence of another adequate reme *174 dy). As such, the Petition for Review in the Nature of Mandamus is DENIED, and the Application to Disqualify Counsel is DISMISSED as moot.

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 8th day of July, 2015, as Petitioner may pursue redress in a civil action, mandamus relief is not available. See Relosky v. Sacco, 514 Pa. 339, 523 A.2d 1112 (1987) (holding that a petitioner may not obtain mandamus relief unless he establishes the absence of another adequate reme *174 dy). As such, the Petition for Review in the Nature of Mandamus is DENIED, and the Application to Disqualify Counsel is DISMISSED as moot.

Kneller, D. v. Stewart, M., 118 A.3d 1106, 632 Pa. 173, 2015 Pa. LEXIS 1458 (Pa. 2015).

Pincite

118 A.3d 1106 (Kneller, D. v. Stewart, M.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related