Commonwealth v. DeBlase, J., Pet

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that “application of an unconstitutional statute” would result in a miscarriage of justice
• holding that 14 Case: 19-11436 Date Filed: 03/11/2020 Page: 15 of 15 party did not waive argument because, “more significant[ly],” the “proper resolution” of the matter was “clear as a bell”
• exercising discretion to consider an issue not raised in the district court where “the proper resolution of th[e] matter [was] as clear as a bell to us”
• “[A]n issue not raised in the district court and raised for the first time in an appeal will not be considered by this court.”
• “[T]he legislature need not have actually been motivated by the rational reason presented to the court . . . .”
• “As a general rule, an issue not raised in the district court and raised for the first time in an appeal will not be considered by this [C]ourt.” (quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).