Lehigh Valley Dual Language Charter School v. State Charter School Appeal Board

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Lehigh Valley Dual Language Charter School v. State Charter School Appeal Board

114 A.3d 412, 631 Pa. 534, 2015 Pa. LEXIS 993

DecidedMay 6, 2015

StatusPublished

This text of 114 A.3d 412 (Lehigh Valley Dual Language Charter School v. State Charter School Appeal Board) 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

Lehigh Valley Dual Language Charter School v. State Charter School Appeal Board, 114 A.3d 412, 631 Pa. 534, 2015 Pa. LEXIS 993 (Pa. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 6th day of May, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, LIMITED TO the issues [535]*535set forth below. Allocatur is DENIED as to all remaining issues. The issues, as stated by Petitioner, are:

(1) Whether or not the Panel’s Majority Opinion and Order presents issues of first impression to the extent that it permits a charter school to open a second location by amending its charter and/or confers CAB with jurisdiction to hear a charter school’s appeal from any and all denials to amend a charter school’s charter?

(2) Whether or not the Majority’s Opinion and Order has departed from accepted judicial practices or abused its discretion when it misapplied the rules of statutory construction and/or relied on dicta?

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

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 6th day of May, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, LIMITED TO the issues [535]*535set forth below. Allocatur is DENIED as to all remaining issues. The issues, as stated by Petitioner, are:

(1) Whether or not the Panel’s Majority Opinion and Order presents issues of first impression to the extent that it permits a charter school to open a second location by amending its charter and/or confers CAB with jurisdiction to hear a charter school’s appeal from any and all denials to amend a charter school’s charter?

(2) Whether or not the Majority’s Opinion and Order has departed from accepted judicial practices or abused its discretion when it misapplied the rules of statutory construction and/or relied on dicta?

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

114 A.3d 412, 631 Pa. 534, 2015 Pa. LEXIS 993, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lehigh-valley-dual-language-charter-school-v-state-charter-school-appeal-pa-2015.