Fair hearings by state agencies
Romanoski v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission
In brief
- Where it stands
- Dismissed
Petition denied.
- What it’s about
- David A.
- Who it affects
- Romanoski did not get Supreme Court review; the Court did not decide whether the state proceedings violated due process.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
Romanoski's petition asks whether the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission denied him a fair chance to be heard by resolving his case on an untested factual premise, whether the state appeals court could uphold the decision on a ground the parties had not argued, and whether the agency could shift its grounds on appeal.
Romanoski's petition focused on how the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission handled his case and how the Commonwealth Court upheld the agency's decision.
Question presented
1. Whether the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment is violated when a state administrative agency resolves a case on a dispositive factual premise not developed through an evidentiary process, rejects contrary evidence without a hearing, and denies a party a meaningful opportunity to be heard. 2. Whether due process is violated when a state appellate court affirms on a ground not raised or litigated by the parties, without notice or an opportunity to be heard. 3. Whether due process is violated when a state agency alters its position on appeal and prevails on shifting and inconsistent grounds not subject to adversarial testing.
Documents
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
AI analysis generated: Decision Record
New analysis added
Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata
Show 2 moreShow fewer
Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata
Brief added: Petition
More questions
- Does the denial mean the Supreme Court agreed with Pennsylvania's courts?
- No. Refusing review did not endorse the state courts' reasoning or decide the due-process issues.
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.