Rinkhoff, B. v. CCP Greene
Opinion
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA WESTERN DISTRICT
BRYCE RINKHOFF, INDIVIDUALLY AND : No. 11 WM 2018 AS A MEMBER OF RINKHOFF : AGRICULTURAL ENTERPRISES, L.L.C., :
:
Petitioner :
: :
v. :
: :
THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, : GREENE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, : PRESIDENT JUDGE, FARLEY : TOOTHMAN, :
:
Respondent :
ORDER
PER CURIAM
AND NOW, this 1st day of May, 2018, the Application for Permission to Reply, to
the extent it seeks leave to respond to the no-answer letter, is GRANTED. In all other
respects, the Application for Permission to Reply is DENIED. The Petition for Writ of
Prohibition is DENIED. The Application for Intervention is DISMISSED. The Prothonotary
is DIRECTED to strike the name of the jurist from the caption.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Rinkhoff, B. v. CCP Greene (Rinkhoff, B. v. CCP Greene) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.