DRISCOLL v. CORBETT

Nos. 19 MAP 2013, 20 MAP 2013.

69 A.3d 197 (2013)

Senior Judge John DRISCOLL, Senior Judge Sandra Mazer Moss, and Judge Joseph D. O'Keefe, Petitioners v. Thomas W. CORBETT, Jr., Governor of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Carol T. Aichele, Secretary of the Commonwealth, and Zygmont A. Pines, Court Administrator of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Respondents Judge Arthur Tilson, Petitioner v. Thomas W. Corbett, Jr., Governor of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Carol T. Aichele, Secretary of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and Zygmont A. Pines, Court Administrator of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Respondents.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

Decided June 17, 2013.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Alexander Robert Bilus, Esq. , David Samuel Caroline, Esq. , Robert C. Heim, Esq. , William T. McEnroe , Dechert, LLP, Philadelphia, for Sr. Judge John Driscoll; Sr. Judge Sandra Mazer Moss; Sr. Judge Joseph O'Keefe, Petitioners in Case No. 19 MAP 2013.

Kathleen M. Granahan, Esq. , John G. Knorr III, Esq. , Harrisburg, PA Office of Attorney General, John Bartley Delone, Esq. , Harrisburg, for Thomas W. Corbett, Jr., Carol T. Aichele.

Patrick Schaffner Cawley, Esq. , PA Office of Attorney General, Harrisburg, for Republican Caucus of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives.

Jonathan Lee Cochran, Esq. , Michele D. Hangley, Esq. , William T. Hangley, Esq. , Hangley Aronchik Segal Pudlin & Schiller, P.C., Philadelphia, for Arthur Tilson, Petitioner in Case No. 20 MAP 2013.

Taylor Williams, Esq. , Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts, for Zygmont A. Pines, Respondent in Case No. 20 MAP 2013.

BEFORE: CASTILLE, C.J., SAYLOR, EAKIN, BAER, TODD, McCAFFERY, JJ.


OPINION

Justice SAYLOR.

Challenging an express constitutional command and attendant judicial precedent, Petitioners seek to nullify the mandatory retirement provision of the Pennsylvania Constitution applicable to judicial officers.

I.

By way of background, in 1967-68, a limited constitutional convention was convened with the approval of Pennsylvania voters. Its purpose was to consider certain proposed changes to the state charter...

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