From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Elliott v. Cruz

SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT
Mar 31, 2016
134 A.3d 51 (Pa. 2016)

Opinion

No. 29 MAP 2016

03-31-2016

Carmon ELLIOTT, Appellant v. Ted CRUZ, Appellee.

Kathleen Marie Kotula, Esq., PA Department of State, for Kathleen Kotula. Einer Elhauge, Pro Se. Mary Brigid McManamon, Pro Se. Victor Williams, Pro Se. Roger J. Bernstein, Esq., J. David Farrell, Esq., for Carmon Elliott. Robert N. Feltoon, Esq., for Ted Cruz.


Kathleen Marie Kotula, Esq., PA Department of State, for Kathleen Kotula.

Einer Elhauge, Pro Se.

Mary Brigid McManamon, Pro Se.

Victor Williams, Pro Se.

Roger J. Bernstein, Esq., J. David Farrell, Esq., for Carmon Elliott.

Robert N. Feltoon, Esq., for Ted Cruz.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 31st day of March, 2016, the Order of the Commonwealth Court is hereby AFFIRMED. Victor Williams's pro se Notice to Intervene as Appellant is DENIED. Appellant's Application for Oral Argument is DENIED.


Summaries of

Elliott v. Cruz

SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT
Mar 31, 2016
134 A.3d 51 (Pa. 2016)
Case details for

Elliott v. Cruz

Case Details

Full title:CARMON ELLIOTT, Appellant v. TED CRUZ, Appellee

Court:SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT

Date published: Mar 31, 2016

Citations

134 A.3d 51 (Pa. 2016)