Pardini Ex Rel. Pardini v. Allegheny Intermediate Unit

How courts have described this case

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

• observing that if two precedential “cases conflict, the earlier is the controlling authority and the latter is ineffective as precedent[].” (quoting United States v. Rivera, 365 F.3d 213, 213 (3d Cir. 2004))
• where a later panel decision “is inconsistent with [an earlier 9 underscored “that the Constitution protects the right to receive information,” particularly “to protect the free discussion of governmental affairs.” Id. at 180 (emphasis added) (citations omitted

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).