McCann v. Commonwealth
This text of 455 A.2d 1272 (McCann v. Commonwealth) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Opinion by
The Honorable Robert J. Conway and James J. McCann filed separate petitions for review1 seeking from the Honorable Alexander F. Barbieri2 and R. Budd Dwyer3 salary during periods of suspension from their respective benches. We transfer these actions to our Supreme Court under the provisions of 42 Pa. C. S. §5103(a).4
[77]*77Conway and McCann were indicted in separate instances for various offenses.5 Both were suspended by the Supreme Court for violations of the Code of Judicial Conduct under that Court’s exclusive constitutional authority over the disciplining of the Pennsylvania judiciary.6 As we have stated previously in Reed v. Sloan, 25 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 570, 360 A.2d 767 (1976), aff'd 475 Pa. 570, 381 A.2d 421 (1977), when the Code of Judicial Conduct is applicable, our Supreme Court has exclusive jurisdiction under Article V of the Constitution of Pennsylvania. [78]*78The actions of Conway and McCann are simply thinly-veiled collateral attacks on orders of the Supreme Court. It is clear beyond reasonable doubt that we cannot review orders of our Supreme Court.
Order
The petitions for review of James J. McCann and Robert J. Conway are hereby transferred to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court for their proper adjudication.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
455 A.2d 1272, 72 Pa. Commw. 75, 1983 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 1333, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mccann-v-commonwealth-pacommwct-1983.