Common Cause of Pennsylvania v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 06-3391
In a suit challenging a short-lived Pennsylvania statute, Act 44, that increased salaries for state legislators, executive officials and state judges, alleging that members of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court have traded judicial decisions favorable to the Pennsylvania General Assembly in return for the legislature's funding the state judiciary, dismissal of suit is affirmed where Plaintiffs lack standing.
- Decided 02/26/2009
- Published 02/26/2009
Before: FLAUM, EBEL and LEVAL, Circuit Judges.
United States Third Circuit
Eric B. Schnurer, Esq. (Argued), West Chester, PA, and Paul A. Rossi, Esq., Mountville, PA, for Appellants.
Mark A. Aronchick, Esq., Wendy Beetlestone, Esq., Hangley Aronchick Segal & Pudlin, Philadelphia, PA, for Appellee Edward G. Rendell., C. Clark Hodgson, Jr., Esq., Jonathon F. Bloom, Esq., Thomas W. Dymek, Esq., Stradley, Ronon, Stevens & Young, Philadelphia, PA, for Appellees David G. Argall, H. William DeWeese, John M. Perzel, Samuel H. Smith, and Michael R. Veon., John P. Krill, Jr., Esq. (Argued), Linda J. Shorey, Esq., Amy L. Groff, Esq., Kirkpatrick & Lockhart Preston Gates Ellis, Harrisburg, PA, for Appellees David Brightbill and Robert C. Jubelirer., James F. Tierney IV, Esq., Patrick Heffron, Esq., Eugene F. Hickey II, Esq., Cipriani & Werner, Scranton, PA, for Appellee Robert J. Mellow., Arlin M. Adams, Esq. (Argued), Paul H. Titus, Esq., Bruce P. Merenstein, Esq., Schnader Harrison Segal & Lewis, Philadelphia, PA, and Howard M. Holmes, Chief Legal Counsel, Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts, Philadelphia, PA, for Appellee Ralph J. Cappy.