Court Opinion

ID: 9713849
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 05:24:13.050612+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:23:21.008118
License: Public Domain

*822PELLEGRINI, Judge,
concurring.
I agree with the analysis contained in Judge McGinley’s dissenting opinion that this Court’s recent opinion in In re Appointment of District Attorney, 756 A.2d 711 (Pa.Cmwlth.2000) controls the outcome of this case. By not following the reasoning cited by Judge McGinley, I take it that the majority now inferentially repudiates that portion of In re Appointment of District Attorney holding that a home rule charter cannot contain provisions that are at variance with a law that is only applicable in certain parts of the Commonwealth. Because the majority inferentially has reversed that holding, I join in the majority opinion.
FLAHERTY, J., joins.