From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mincy v. Olenginski

SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT
Jan 26, 2012
No. 121 MM 2011 (Pa. Jan. 26, 2012)

Opinion

No. 121 MM 2011

01-26-2012

HILTON KARRIEM MINCY, Petitioner v. CAROLEE MEDICO OLENGINSKI, PROTHONOTARY FOR THE COMMON PLEAS COURT OF LUZERNE COUNTY; BOB SYPNIEWSKI, DEPUTY PROTHONOTARY FOR THE COMMON PLEAS COURT OF LUZERNE COUNTY; AND THE COMMON PLEAS COURT OF LUZERNE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA; AND CHESTER B. MUROSKI, PRESIDENT JUDGE FOR THE COMMON PLEAS COURT OF LUZERNE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, Respondents


ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 26th day of January, 2012, the Application for Leave to File Original Process is GRANTED, and the Petition for Writ of Mandamus, the "Application for Leave to File Original Process;" which is treated as an Application for Relief, the Application to Strike, and the "Answer and New Matter" are DENIED. The Prothonotary is directed to strike the jurist's name from the caption.


Summaries of

Mincy v. Olenginski

SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT
Jan 26, 2012
No. 121 MM 2011 (Pa. Jan. 26, 2012)
Case details for

Mincy v. Olenginski

Case Details

Full title:HILTON KARRIEM MINCY, Petitioner v. CAROLEE MEDICO OLENGINSKI…

Court:SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT

Date published: Jan 26, 2012

Citations

No. 121 MM 2011 (Pa. Jan. 26, 2012)

Citing Cases

Mincy v. Luzerne Cnty.

Plaintiff also alleges that his failure to include fees should have been addressed with an advisory notice,…