green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
9.1 score
“pa. r.a.p. 1972(a)(4) permits a party to move for dismissal for mootness during litigation.”
Treatment trajectory · 2010 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2010
2018
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Z. Spada v. PA DOC, A.G. of PA, in their individual and official capacities
pa. r.a.p. 1972(a)(4) permits a party to move for dismissal for mootness during litigation.
discussed
Cited "see"
M. Rokita, Jr. v. The PA DOC
See Harris v. Rendell, 982 A.2d 1030, 1036 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2009), aff’d, 992 A.2d 121 (Pa. 2010) (holding an inmates’ claims for declaratory relief became moot upon their release on parole or re-parole); see also In re Gross, 382 A.2d 116, 120 (Pa. 1978) (holding “[c]onstitutional questions are not to be dealt with abstractly”).
discussed
Cited "see"
L.C. Velez v. J.E. Wetzel, Sec. of Corr'
See Harris v. Rendell, 982 A.2d 1030, 1036 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2009), aff’d, 992 A.2d 121 (Pa. 2010) (holding an inmate’s claims for declaratory relief became moot upon his release from prison); Hayes v. Pennsylvania Department of Corrections (Pa. Cmwlth., No. 90 M.D. 2017, filed March 26, 2018) (same);2 see also In re Gross, 382 A.2d 116, 120 (Pa. 1978) (holding “[c]onstitutional questions are not to be dealt with abstractly”).
discussed
Cited "see"
C. Toland v. PBPP
See Harris v. Rendell, 982 A.2d 1030, 1036 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2009) (“It is within the [C]ourt’s ‘discretion to decide substantial questions, otherwise moot, that are capable of repetition unless settled.’”), aff’d, 992 A.2d 121 (Pa. 2010) (quoting In re Bishop, 717 A.2d 1114, 1116 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1998)).
discussed
Cited "see"
T.A. Hayes v. PA DOC
See Harris v. Rendell, 982 A.2d 1030 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2009), aff’d, 992 A.2d 121 (Pa. 2010); see also Cobb v. Yost, 342 Fed.Appx. 858, 859 (3d Cir. 2009) (“[A]n inmate’s claim for . . . declaratory relief becomes moot on his release from prison.”) (unreported); Sutton v. Rasheed, 323 F.3d 236 (3d Cir. 2003).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
K.C. Tolbert v. PA DOC
Compare Harris v. Rendell, 982 A.2d 1030, 1036 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2009), aff’d, 992 A.2d 121 (Pa. 2010) (inmate’s claims for declaratory relief were moot upon inmate’s release from prison).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Jarvie, M. v. Cumulus Media, Inc.
See Border, supra at 954 (issue of removal of life support from incapacitated person capable of repetition yet evading review); see also Harris v. Rendell, 982 A.2d 1030, 1037 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2009), affirmed, 992 A.2d 121 (Pa. 2010) (finding repetition exception did not apply where appellant did not take advantage of procedures permitting immediate or expedited review of preliminary injunctive relief).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Laverne HARRIS; Elizabeth Clark; Gary Christopher; Derrick Bostic, Appellants
v.
Edward G. RENDELL, Governor of Pennsylvania and Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole and Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, Appellees.
v.
Edward G. RENDELL, Governor of Pennsylvania and Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole and Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, Appellees.
75 MAP 2009.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
Apr 28, 2010.
992 A.2d 121
[*122] ORDER
PER CURIAM.
AND NOW, this 28th day of April, 2010, the Order of the Commonwealth Court is hereby AFFIRMED.