Commonwealth v. Mockaitis

How courts have described this case

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

• holding this Court has supervisory powers over its employees, and “[t]his Court has not hesitated to strike down legislation that clearly violates the separation of powers doctrine.”
• noting that the constitutionally infirm provisions of Act 63 of 2003 are severable
• noting that the constitutionally infirm provisions of Act 63 of 2003 are severable
• defining the distinction between a court’s jurisdiction, which relates “solely to the competency of the particular court” to address the general class of controversies and a court’s power to act which is “the ability of a decision-making body to order or effect a certain result”
• defining the distinction between a court's jurisdiction, which relates \solely to the competency of the particular court\ to address the general class of controversies and a court's power to act which is \the ability of a decision-making body to order or effect a certain result\
• General Assembly cannot “deputize” judicial employees to perform duties exclusively reserved to legislative or executive branch

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).