From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lomas v. Kravitz

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
Aug 24, 2016
147 A.3d 517 (Pa. 2016)

Opinion

No. 52 MAL 2016.

08-24-2016

Roy H. LOMAS, Sr., d/b/a Roy Lomas Carpet Contractor, Respondent, v. James B. KRAVITZ, Cherrydale Construction Co., Andorra Springs Development, Inc., and Kravmar, Inc. f/k/a Eastern Development Enterprises Inc., Petitioners.


ORDER

AND NOW, this 24th day of August, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, LIMITED TO the issues set forth below. Allocatur is DENIED as to all remaining issues. The issues, as stated by Petitioner, are:

(1) Whether, as a matter of law, the Montgomery County Court of Common Pleas should have been recused from presiding over the non-jury trial due to an appearance of impropriety arising from the ongoing participation and financial interest in the litigation by a sitting member of that Court?

(2) Whether, as a matter of law, an appearance of impropriety was created when a sitting member of the Montgomery County Bench personally participated in the litigation?

Justices DONOHUE and WECHT did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.


Summaries of

Lomas v. Kravitz

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
Aug 24, 2016
147 A.3d 517 (Pa. 2016)
Case details for

Lomas v. Kravitz

Case Details

Full title:Roy H. LOMAS, Sr., d/b/a Roy Lomas Carpet Contractor, Respondent, v. James…

Court:Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

Date published: Aug 24, 2016

Citations

147 A.3d 517 (Pa. 2016)

Citing Cases

Lomas v. James B. Kravitz, Cherrydale Constr. Co.

Appellee contends that, since the issues presented for review are framed in terms of whether recusal was…

Lomas v. Kravitz

Appellee contends that, since the issues presented for review are framed in terms of whether recusal was…