From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Manson v. Schulman

SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN DISTRICT
Mar 7, 2016
133 A.3d 290 (Pa. 2016)

Opinion

No. 6 EM 2016.

03-07-2016

Kashyism MANSON, Petitioner v. Judge Susan I. SCHULMAN, Respondent.


ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 7th day of March, 2016, the Application for Leave to File Original Process and the Petition for Writ of Mandamus and/or Extraordinary Relief are DISMISSED. See Commonwealth v. Ali, 608 Pa. 71, 10 A.3d 282, 293 (2010) (explaining that a pro se filing presented by an appellant represented by counsel is a “legal ity”).

The Prothonotary is DIRECTED to forward the filings to counsel of record and to strike the name of the jurist from the caption.

Justice EAKIN did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.


Summaries of

Manson v. Schulman

SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN DISTRICT
Mar 7, 2016
133 A.3d 290 (Pa. 2016)
Case details for

Manson v. Schulman

Case Details

Full title:KASHYISM MANSON, Petitioner v. JUDGE SUSAN I. SCHULMAN, Respondent

Court:SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN DISTRICT

Date published: Mar 7, 2016

Citations

133 A.3d 290 (Pa. 2016)