# Rufo v. Bd. of License & Inspection Review

> Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · September 13, 2018 · 192 A.3d 1113

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9887256

## Case

- **Full name:** Anthony M. RUFO and TR Gretz, LP v. BOARD OF LICENSE AND INSPECTION REVIEW and City of Philadelphia Appeal Of: The City of Philadelphia
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** September 13, 2018
- **Citations:** 192 A.3d 1113
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Wecht
- **Judges:** Saylor, Wecht
- **Cited by:** 5 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9887256

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- observing that appellees [J-107-2018] - 23 have no obligation to preserve issues
- declining to review issues preserved below but not addressed by the trial court and remanding for their resolution
- observing that appellees have no obligation to preserve issues

## Opinion text

JUSTICE WECHT, Concurring
I join the Majority Opinion in full.
I write separately because, although the Majority applies the operative constitutional standard, see Majority Opinion at 1120 (citing Lutz v. Armour , 151 A.2d 108 , 110 (Pa. 1959) ) ("[T]o pass constitutional muster, the Code, and the provisions therein, 'must not be unreasonable, unduly oppressive or patently beyond the necessities of the case, and the means which it employs must have a real and substantial relation to the objects sought to be attained.' "), I believe that this Court should abandon that test and embrace the more deferential federal standard. See Shoul v. Pa., Dep't of Transp., Bureau of Driver Licensing , 173 A.3d 669 , 690 (Pa. 2017) (Wecht, J., Concurring) (citing Williamson v. Lee Optical of Oklahoma Inc. , 348 U.S. 483 , 487-88 (1955), for the proposition that, under rational basis scrutiny, "[a] law need not be in every respect logically consistent with its aims to be constitutional. It is enough that there is an evil at hand for correction, and that it might be thought that the particular legislative measure was a rational way to correct it."); City of Phila. v. Lerner , 151 A.3d 1020 , 1024 (Pa. 2016).

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9887256. Public record. Not legal advice.