Schnee J. Chadwick

Schnee Legal Services We understand your challenges. We strive to be accessible, responsive and affordable. We know the importance of finding a law firm you can trust and thats why your trust is our top priority. Book A Consultation Practice Areas Municipal Law Right-to-Know Law (Open Records law) Button Right To Know Law Portraits of people from around the globe Button Sunshine Act Stark beauty of desolate dunes Button Civil Litigation Visual odyssey across continents Button Guardianship Matters Button Mental Health Expungements Button Labor and Employment Law Button Appellate Litigation Button My top priority is to earn your trust and keep it.- J. Chadwick Schnee, Esquire Why Clients Choose Us Our lawyers are dedicated to ensuring that you get personal attention and top-quality service for all of your legal concerns. More Schnee Legal Services In Numbers 10+ A seasoned attorney with more than a decade of experience, J. Chadwick (Chad) Schnee started his law firm to serve clients in a wide variety of matters, including labor and employment law, municipal issues, Right-to-Know (open records), Sunshine Act and guardianship matters. Schnee Legal Services litigates matters throughout Pennsylvania. 5 Bar Admissions The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania U. S. Third Circuit Court of Appeals U. S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania U. S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania U. S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania 4 Authored four books focusing on the Right-to-Know Law and the Sunshine Act. With a commitment to excellence and a passion for justice, we are here to support you every step of the way. Dont navigate the complexities of the legal system alone, let us be your trusted partner. us now to schedule your consultation and start your journey toward resolution and peace of mind. Book A Consultation At Schnee Legal Services, we understand the importance of trust and will do what it takes to earn it. Slide title Chadwick is a great lawyer with amazing attention to detail. He really cares about his clients, and helped us a lot with an important case over the last couple years. ~ Richard Button Slide title Chadwick is an amazing attorney who is willing to take challenging cases and fight valiantly for his clients. His billing is transparent, and it has been a privilege to have him represent me. ~ Chris Button News & Updates Legal Insights with Attorney Schnee, Navigating the Path of Justice The Importance of Procedural Due Process: A Successful Expungement of a Mental Health Commitment In Erie County, PA By J. Chadwick Schnee, Esq • January 1, 2025 The Importance of Procedural Due Process: A Successful Expungement of a Mental Health Commitment in Erie County, PA Are public libraries subject to the Right-to-Know Law? Definitely maybe. By J. Chadwick Schnee, Esq • December 1, 2024 Are public libraries subject to the Right-to-Know Law? Definitely maybe. Post-trial motions not required in Right-to-Know Law enforcement By J. Chadwick Schnee, Esq • November 1, 2024 As a matter of first impression, a Commonwealth Court judge has ruled that post-trial motions under Pa. R. Civ. P. 227.1 are not required in an appeal from an order in a Right-to-Know Law enforcement action. In Walker v. County of Bucks, a requester filed an enforcement action against an agency and its open-records officer where the agency had filed two appeals of the same OOR final order (rather than two appeals of two different OOR final orders), arguing that relief in mandamus was appropriate because one of the two OOR final orders was not appealed.[1] The trial court rejected the complaint, holding that relief in mandamus is not clear at this time due to a pending motion to substitute one its appeals.[2] The requester appealed but did not file post-trial motions. The agency argued that, under Pa. R. Civ. P. 227.1, the requester waived all issues on appeal and her appeal must be dismissed because she did not file post-trial motions. Commonwealth Court Judge Dumas disagreed, holding that a RTKL enforcement action is not a situation where post-trial motions had to be filed because the complaint in mandamus was covered by petition practice as set forth under the Note to Pa R. A. P. 3761.[3] Instead, it is evident that the mandamus action filed by Appellant was in petition practice, such that post-trial motions were not necessary.[4] While this is an unreported memorandum opinion of a single member of the Commonwealth Court, parties to a RTKL enforcement action potentially may not be required to file post-trial motions in order to preserve issues on appeal. (This post should not be considered legal advice. For more information or to discuss, Attorney Schnee can be reached at [email protected] ). [1] Walker v. County of Bucks, 974 C. D. 2023 (Pa. Cmwlth. Jan. 31, 2024) (Dumas, J.) (unreported). The author represents the requester in this matter. [2] Id. [3]The Note provides Pa. R. A. P. 3761(b) provides the method for seeking compliance with a final determination of the Office of Open Records in the Commonwealth Court. This differs from proceeding in the courts of common pleas, where the method to obtain judicial review of alleged failure to comply with a final determination of the Office of Open Records may be an action in mandamus or other petition authorized by local rule. Capinski v. Upper Pottsgrove Township, 164 A.3d 601 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2017). Use of this petition is appropriate when the final determination was not appealed. If an appeal was taken and the order affirmed by the Commonwealth Court, enforcement is not of the final determination of the Office of Open Records, but rather of the order of the Commonwealth Court. [4] Walker v. County of Bucks, 974 C. D. 2023 (Pa. Cmwlth. Jan. 31, 2024) (Dumas, J.) (unreported). Show More