[J-62-2016]
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
EASTERN DISTRICT
JOHN J. DOUGHERTY, : No. 6 EAP 2015
:
Appellant : Appeal from the Judgment of the
: Superior Court entered on 8/14/14 at
v. : No. 1333 EDA 2012 affirming the order
: entered on 4/11/12 in the Court of
KAREN HELLER, : Common Pleas, Civil Division,
: Philadelphia County at No. 00699
Appellee : December Term 2009
:
: ARGUED: May 9, 2016
CONCURRING STATEMENT
SENIOR JUDGE LEADBETTER DECIDED: June 14, 2016
I join in the thoughtful opinion of the court. I write separately simply to emphasize
that, with respect to the second prong of the collateral order doctrine, appellant’s
asserted claims of harm are simply too speculative to evaluate. Had the deposition gone
forward and some concrete and substantial invasion of privacy occurred, application of
the doctrine might have been in order. However, in the present posture it is impossible
to say that appellant has any interest at all to protect, let alone one “too important to be
denied review.”