• Commonwealth, Department of Corrections v. Lindsey

  Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2009-12-01 · cited 2×

  The case involved the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections seeking a preliminary injunction to authorize involuntary medical treatment, including blood transfusions required for surgery, on inmate Anthony Lindsey who suffered from severe kidney disease and related conditions. Lindsey refused the transfusions due to his religious beliefs. The court denied the injunction after determining that Lindsey's First Amendment right to refuse unwanted medical treatment outweighed the Department's Eighth Amendment duty to provide adequate care, finding his decision to be knowing, intelligent, voluntary, and based on sincere religious conviction rather than manipulation.

  criminal lawreligious libertycivil rightshealthcare

  Read the full opinion inline ▾ (815 words)

• GAZZE v. Cortes

  Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2008-11-05 · cited 1×

  Petitioner Ronald Gazze filed a mandamus action seeking to compel the Pennsylvania Secretary of the Commonwealth to accept his nomination papers as an independent candidate for the state House, which had been rejected for lacking a Committee to Fill Vacancies (among other issues). The court examined prior single-judge opinions and concluded that the Election Code makes designation of such a committee mandatory on circulated papers, constituting a fatal defect unless the candidate provides competent evidence that signers understood the committee's existence and membership. Gazze admitted no committee existed when signatures were gathered and offered no such evidence of signer awareness, so the court held the defect was not amendable. It therefore dismissed the complaint.

  elections

  Read the full opinion inline ▾ (1,131 words)

• In Re Nomination Papers of Dunmire

  Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2008-01-09 · cited 2×

  This case involved a challenge to the nomination papers of Jack F. Dunmire as a candidate for Armstrong County Commissioner in the 2007 election. Appellants sought to set aside the papers on the ground that two pages containing 50 signatures failed to name a committee to fill vacancies, as required by the Election Code. The trial court rejected the challenge and upheld the papers, but the Commonwealth Court reversed, ruling that the statutory requirement is mandatory and must appear on every sheet of the petition when circulated. Because no evidence was presented to show that the signers understood they were supporting a candidate backed by a political body, the court held that the 50 signatures must be stricken, leaving insufficient valid signatures and requiring removal of Dunmire from the ballot.

  elections

  Read the full opinion inline ▾ (777 words)

Affiliations