O'Connor v. City of Philadelphia Board of Ethics

Cozen O’CONNOR, Petitioner v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA BOARD OF ETHICS and City of Philadelphia, Respondents

987 A.2d 715, 605 Pa. 129, 2009 Pa. LEXIS 2896 • 2009-12-29

Citation987 A.2d 715, 605 Pa. 129, 2009 Pa. LEXIS 2896

Date Filed2009-12-29

Docket181 EAL 2009

JudgePer Curiam

Cited2 times

StatusPublished

Procedural Posture

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Commonwealth Court, No. 181 EAL 2009. Prior report: Pa.Cmwlth., 970 A.2d 504 .

Full Opinion (html_with_citations)

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 29th day of December, 2009, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, LIMITED TO the issue set forth below. Allocatur is DENIED as to all remaining issues. The issue, rephrased for clarity, is:

Did Cozen O’Connor have standing to obtain a declaratory judgment where Cozen O’Connor alleged in its complaint that it intended to forgive the outstanding debt of the Friends of Bob Brady Campaign Committee at one time and in toto, thereby exposing itself to potential civil penalties *130 and other sanctions under Phila. Code § 20-612 for violations of Phila. Code § 20-1002?