Suburban Cable Tv v. Com., B. of Fin., 591 A.2d 1054 (Pa. 1991). · Go Syfert
Suburban Cable Tv v. Com., B. of Fin., 591 A.2d 1054 (Pa. 1991). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“eclaratory judgment is not appropriate to determine rights in anticipation of events which may never occur; it is an appropriate remedy only where a case presents antagonistic claims indicating imminent and inevitable litigation”
23 citation events (12 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Rendell v. Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission (pa, 2009-11-30)
Treatment trajectory · 1992 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1992 2009 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 5 distinct citers.
examined Cited as authority (quoted) Rendell v. Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission
Pa. · 2009 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence low
eclaratory judgment is not appropriate to determine rights in anticipation of events which may never occur; it is an appropriate remedy only where a case presents antagonistic claims indicating imminent and inevitable litigation
discussed Cited "see" Lancaster Laboratories, Inc. v. Commonwealth (2×)
Pa. Commw. Ct. · 1993 · signal: see · confidence high
See Stewart Honeybee Products v. Commonwealth, 525 Pa. 222 , 579 A.2d 872 (1990), and Suburban Cable TV Co. v. Commonwealth, 131 Pa.Commonwealth Ct. 368, 570 A.2d 601 (1990), affirmed, per curiam, 527 Pa. 364 , 591 A.2d 1054 (1991). 2 .
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Commonwealth v. Philip Morris Inc.
pactcomplphilad · 1999 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also, Pennsylvania State Lodge of Fraternal Order of Police by Bascelli v. Commonwealth, 131 Pa. Commw. 611, 613-14 , 571 A.2d 531, 532 (1990), aff’d, 527 Pa. 363 , 591 A.2d 1054 (1991) (the FOP’s petition for declaratory judgment that certain pension laws violated the Pennsylvania Constitution’s authorization of collective bargaining was dismissed where the FOP failed to allege that any contract with the Commonwealth had not been enforced because of the challenged statutes); Pennsylvania Gamefowl Breeders Association v. Commonwealth, 533 A.2d 838 , 840-41 (Pa. Commw. 1987) (petition…
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Pennsylvania State Lodge v. Commonwealth
Pa. Commw. Ct. · 1997 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Pennsylvania State Lodge of the Fraternal Order of Police v. Commonwealth, 131 Pa.Cmwlth. 611 , 571 A.2d 531, 533 (1990), aff'd, 527 Pa. 363 , 591 A.2d 1054 (1991) (Declaratory judgment is not appropriate to determine rights in anticipation of events which may never occur; it is an appropriate remedy only where a case presents antagonistic claims indicating imminent and inevitable litigation).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Nader v. Hughes
Pa. Commw. Ct. · 1994 · signal: see also · confidence low
In Citizens For State Hospital , we further stated, citing William Penn Parking, that to be considered aggrieved: a party, seeking to challenge governmental action, “must show a direct and substantial interest,” i.e. an interest other than that of the general public which will be adversely affected by the challenged action, and “show a sufficiently close causal connection between the challenged action and the asserted injury to qualify the injury as ‘immediate’ rather than ‘remote.’ ” Citizens, 123 Pa.Commonwealth Ct. at 156, 553 A.2d at 498 ; See also Pennsylvania State Lodge …
SUBURBAN CABLE TV CO., INC. (Appellant at No. 94); Lebanon Valley Cable TV Co. (Appellant at No. 95); Warner Cable Corp. of Pittsburgh (Appellant at No. 97); Warner Amex Cable Communications, Inc. (Appellant at No. 98)
v.
COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, BOARD OF FINANCE AND REVENUE (Appellant at Nos. 90, 91, 92 and 93)
Appeal 90-95, 97 and 98 M.D. Appeal Dkt. 1990.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
Jun 4, 1991.
591 A.2d 1054
Larsen, Papadakos.
Cited by 8 opinions  |  Published
1 passage pin-cited by 1 case
Pinpoint authority: bottom 74%
Citer courts: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania (1)

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

Order affirmed.

LARSEN, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case. PAPADAKOS, J., did not participate in the decision of this case.