Scientific Games International, Inc. v. Commonwealth, Department of Revenue

43 A.3d 1289, 615 Pa. 457, 2012 WL 1624875, 2012 Pa. LEXIS 1070

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided May 10, 2012·No. No. 20 MM 2012·Published

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 10th day of May, 2012, the Petition for Permission to Appeal is GRANTED. The questions to be addressed by the parties are

A. Does the Board of Claims have exclusive jurisdiction to determine claims arising under a contract with the Commonwealth, including the claim that a contract exists?

B. Does the exception to the Board of Claims’ exclusive jurisdiction over contract claims apply only when jurisdiction in another forum is otherwise expressly and specifically “provided by law”?

The Board of Claims’ Application for Relief is DISMISSED AS MOOT, without prejudice to the Board of Claims to file an amicus curiae brief per Pa.R.A.P. 531.

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 May, 2012, the Petition for Permission to Appeal is GRANTED. The questions to be addressed by the parties are

A. Does the Board of Claims have exclusive jurisdiction to determine claims arising under a contract with the Commonwealth, including the claim that a contract exists?

B. Does the exception to the Board of Claims’ exclusive jurisdiction over contract claims apply only when jurisdiction in another forum is otherwise expressly and specifically “provided by law”?

The Board of Claims’ Application for Relief is DISMISSED AS MOOT, without prejudice to the Board of Claims to file an amicus curiae brief per Pa.R.A.P. 531.

Scientific Games International, Inc. v. Commonwealth, Department of Revenue, 43 A.3d 1289, 615 Pa. 457, 2012 WL 1624875, 2012 Pa. LEXIS 1070 (Pa. 2012).

Pincite

43 A.3d 1289 (Scientific Games International, Inc. v. Commonwealth, Department of Revenue) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.