Brady v. Commonwealth State Board of Chiropractic Examiners
Gregg F. BRADY Et Al., Appellants, v. COMMONWEALTH STATE BOARD OF CHIROPRACTIC EXAMINERS, Appellee; COMMONWEALTH STATE BOARD OF CHIROPRACTIC EXAMINERS, Appellant, v. Gregg F. BRADY Et Al., Appellees
Opinion
ORDER OP THE COURT PER CURIAM.
Appeal dismissed as having been improvidently granted.
Gossman v. Lower Chanceford Township Board of Supervisors, 503 Pa. 392 , 469 A.2d 996 (1983), Xpress Truck Lines, Inc. v. Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board, 503 Pa. 399 , 469 A.2d 1000 (1983), O’Brien v. Commonwealth State Employees’ Retirement System, 503 Pa. 414 , 469 A.2d 1008 (1983), and Pennsylvania Department of Aging v. Lindberg, 503 Pa. 423 , 469 A.2d 1012 (1983).
See also 42 Pa.C.S. § 761 (original jurisdiction of Commonwealth Court); 42 Pa.C.S. § 724(b) (allowance of appeals from Superior and Commonwealth Courts; improvident appeals); Pa.R.A.P. 1102 (treatment of improvident appeals as a petition for allowance of appeal).
JUDGMENT ON CONSIDERATION WHEREOF, it is now hereby ordered and adjudged by this Court that the above appeal is dismissed as having been improvidently granted.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 7 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
- Daniels v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board
- Pennsylvania Medical Society v. Foster
- Brown v. Com., State Bd. of Pharmacy
- Nicoletti v. State Board of Vehicle Manufacturers, Dealers & Salespersons
- Pittenger v. Department of State, Bureau of Professional & Occupational Affairs
- Allen v. DEPT. OF STATE, BUR. OF PROF.
Most recent
- J.D. Mellott v. Dept. of L&I, Bureau of Occupational & Industrial Safety
- Daniels v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board
- Nicoletti v. State Board of Vehicle Manufacturers, Dealers & Salespersons
- Pennsylvania Medical Society v. Foster
- Pittenger v. Department of State, Bureau of Professional & Occupational Affairs
- Allen v. DEPT. OF STATE, BUR. OF PROF.
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.