1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. Pa.
  4. 530 Pa.
  5. 530 Pa. 335 (1992)
 

IN RE 1991 PA. LEGIS. REAPPORTIONMENT

530 Pa. 335 (1992)

609 A.2d 132

In re 1991 PENNSYLVANIA LEGISLATIVE REAPPORTIONMENT COMMISSION.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

Order February 14, 1992.

Opinion May 1, 1992.

Reargument Denied June 29, 1992.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Joe Gambescia, John J. Gambescia, Philadelphia, for petitioners in No. 191 E.D. Misc. Docket 1991.

Stephen J. Harmelin, David H. Pittinsky, Laurence S. Shtasel, Barbara A. Brown, Philadelphia, for Pennsylvania Legislative Reapportionment Com'n [at all cases].

Ernest D. Preate, Jr., Atty. Gen. [at all cases].

Arthur Levy, Media, David E. Landau, Philadelphia, for petitioner in No. 200 E.D. Misc. Docket 1991.

Russell Walker, pro se.

Ken Gormley, Executive Director, Legislative, Reapportionment Com'n, Harrisburg, Barbara A. Brown, Stephen J. Harmelin, Dilworth Paxson Kalish & Kauffman, Philadelphia, Pa., for respondent in No. 124 W.D. Misc. Docket 1991.

Anthony J. Martin, Martin and Martin, P.C., Monroeville, for petitioner in 132 W.D. Misc. Docket 1991.

Stephen J. Harmelin, David H. Pittinsky, Barbara A. Brown, Philadelphia, Robert J. Cindrich, Chairman, Com. of Pa., Pa. Legislative Reapportionment Com'n, Harrisburg, for respondent in No. 132 W.D. Misc. Docket 1991.

Jack W. Connor, Uniontown, for petitioner in No. 134 W.D. Misc. Docket 1991.

Barbara A. Brown, Stephen J. Harmelin, Dilworth Paxson Kalish & Kauffman, Philadelphia, for respondent in 134, 135, 137, 141 and 138 W.D. Misc. Docket 1991.

Thomas Rabbitt Zajac, Uniontown, for petitioner in No. 135 W.D. Misc. Docket 1991.

James T. Davis, John Purcell, Davis & Davis, Uniontown, for petitioner in No. 136 W.D. Misc. Docket 1991.

Robert J. Cindrich, Chairman Commonwealth of Pa., Pa. Legislative Reapportionment Com'n, Harrisburg, Stephen J. Harmelin, Barbara A. Brown, Philadelphia, for respondent in No. 136 W.D. Misc. Docket 1991.

Dante G. Bertani, Greensburg, for petitioner in No. 137 W.D. Misc. Docket 1991.

Dante G. Bertani, Greensburg, for petitioner in No. 141 W.D. Misc. Docket 1991.

John H. Broujos, Carlisle, for petitioner in No. 50 M.D. Misc. Docket 1991.

Arthur Selikoff, Andrew S. Gordon, Harrisburg, for petitioner in No. 52 M.D. Misc. Docket 1991.

Angelo T. Almonti, Allentown, for petitioner in No. 53 M.D. Misc. Docket 1991.

Frederick E. Charles, County Sol., Thomas M. Caffrey, Deputy County Sol., for petitioner in No. 54 M.D. Misc. Docket 1991.

William H. Lamb, West Chester, David Norcross, Washington, D.C., for petitioner in No. 56 M.D. Misc. Docket 1991.

Andrew S. Gordon, Aruthur Selifoff, Harrisburg, F. Joseph Loeper, Drexel Hill, for petitioner in No. 57 M.D. Misc. Docket 1991.

Emory W. Buck, Lansdale, for petitioner in No. 196 E.D. Misc. Docket 1991.

John Randolph Prince, III, Philadelphia, for petitioner in No. 197 E.D. Misc. Docket 1991.

J. Matthew Wolfe, Philadelphia, for petitioner in No. 199 E.D. Misc. Docket 1991.

Mary F. Platt, Philadelphia, David Norcross, Washington, D.C., for petitioner in No. 201 E.D. Misc. Docket 1991.

Donald R. Walko, Jr., Pittsburgh, for petitioner in No. 133 W.D. Misc. Docket 1991.

Dennis J. Miller, Michael J. Mortimer, Pittsburgh, for petitioner in No. 138 W.D. Misc. Docket 1991.

Nicholas Sellers, Villanova, David F.A. Norcross, Linda A. Long, Washington, D.C., for petitioner in No. 190 E.D. Misc. Docket 1991.

Bruce S. Marks, Philadelphia, for petitioner in No. 194 E.D. Misc. Docket 1991.

William E. Miller, Jr., Donald M. Lewis, III, Harrisburg, for petitioner in No. 49 M.D. Misc. Docket 1991.

Eric B. Schnurer, Philadelphia, for petitioner No. 51 M.D. Misc. Docket 1991.

Before NIX, C.J., and FLAHERTY, McDERMOTT, ZAPPALA, PAPADAKOS and CAPPY, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 14th day of February, 1992, pursuant to Article 2, Section 17(d) of the Pennsylvania Constitution, this Court, after consideration of the objections raised in the above-captioned petitions, finds that the Final Plan of the 1991 Pennsylvania Legislative Reapportionment Commission is not contrary to law, and the Petitions for Review are denied.

The deadline of February 18, 1992...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases