Case Title: Philadelphia Entertainment and Development Partners, L.P., d/b/a Foxwoods Casino Philadelphia, Pet. v. City of Philadelphia, City Council for the City of Philadelphia and Department of Licenses and Inspections of City of Philadelphia (Dissenting Statement)

Citation: 

Docket Number: 

State: pennsylvania

Court: Pennsylvania Supreme Court

Date: 2007-12-21T00:00:00Z

Document:
[J-100-2007] IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN DISTRICT PHILADELPHIA ENTERTAINMENT AND DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS, L.P., d/b/a FOXWOODS CASINO PHILADELPHIA, Petitioner v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, AND THE DEPARTMENT OF LICENSES AND INSPECTIONS OF CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, Respondents : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : No. 88 EM 2007 Application for Reargument of Petitioner Philadelphia Entertainment and Development Partners L.P. d/b/a Foxwoods Casino Philadelphia and Request for Expedited Treatment : CONCURRING STATEMENT MR. JUSTICE CASTILLE FILED: December 21, 2007 On the current pleadings, I agree with the denial of the Application for Reargument. However, I would allow Petitioner Philadelphia Entertainment and Development Partners (“PEDP”) the opportunity to amend the original filing in this matter to augment the record with additional and/or disputed facts that demonstrate that PEDP is in fact situated identically to the petitioners in HSP Gaming L.P. v. Council for the City of Philadelphia, ___ A.2d ___ (Pa. 2007), 2007 WL 4226871. I would also retain jurisdiction.