From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

King v. Burr

SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT
Feb 28, 2017
No. 166 MM 2016 (Pa. Feb. 28, 2017)

Opinion

No. 166 MM 2016

02-28-2017

DANIEL KING v. HON. CHARLES B. BURR, II AND HON. BONNIE BRIGANCE LEADBETTER PETITION OF: DANIEL KING AND THOMAS P. GANNON


ORDER

AND NOW, this 28th day of February, 2017, the Application for Leave to File Original Process is GRANTED, and the Petition for Writ of Prohibition is DENIED.

The Application for Relief Pursuant to Pa.R.A.P. 123, filed by Riverwatch Condominium Owners Association, is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. See King v. Delaware County Court of Common Pleas Judge, 2 MM 2017 (order dated February 28, 2017) (issuing a rule on Petitioners "to show cause why they should not be barred from submitting any further filings in this Court relative to the civil action involving Riverwatch Condominium Owners Association, including any related orders concerning the awards of costs, as well as directives barring Thomas P. Gannon, Esquire, from representing Daniel King.").

The Prothonotary is DIRECTED to strike the names of the jurists from the caption.


Summaries of

King v. Burr

SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT
Feb 28, 2017
No. 166 MM 2016 (Pa. Feb. 28, 2017)
Case details for

King v. Burr

Case Details

Full title:DANIEL KING v. HON. CHARLES B. BURR, II AND HON. BONNIE BRIGANCE…

Court:SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT

Date published: Feb 28, 2017

Citations

No. 166 MM 2016 (Pa. Feb. 28, 2017)