Tranquilli, M. v. Judicial Conduct Board
Opinion
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN DISTRICT
MARK V. TRANQUILLI, : No. 83 EM 2020 :
Petitioner :
: :
v. :
: :
JUDICIAL CONDUCT BOARD OF : PENNSYLVANIA, :
:
Respondent :
ORDER
PER CURIAM
AND NOW, this 13th day of November, 2020, The “Petition for Expedited
Allowance of Subpoena Pursuant to Pa.R.J.A. 1701” is DENIED.
To the extent the petition seeks permission to subpoena the Honorable Edward J.
Borkowski to appear as a fact witness at Petitioner’s trial before the Court of Judicial
Discipline, it is noted that Rule of Judicial Administration 1701 does not require an
individual to seek this Court’s permission to subpoena a judge to appear as a fact witness.
See Pa.R.J.A. 1701(B) (“No subpoena to compel a judge or magisterial district judge to
testify as a character witness shall be issued or enforced unless the issuance of the
subpoena shall have been specially allowed by the Supreme Court pursuant to this rule.”).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Tranquilli, M. v. Judicial Conduct Board (Tranquilli, M. v. Judicial Conduct Board) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.