
    619 A.2d 276
    Samuel C. HUTCHISON v. Father Francis LUDDY, Bishop James Hogan, Monsignor Thomas Madden, Monsignor Roy F. Kline, Monsignor Paul Panza, Monsignor Ignatius Wadas, Diocese of Altoona-Johnstown, St. Mary’s Catholic Church, Cardinal John Krol and the Archdiocese of Philadelphia. Appeal of PITTSBURGH PRESS COMPANY.
    Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
    Argued Sept. 26, 1991.
    Decided Feb. 2, 1993.
    
      Scott E. Henderson, Kevin C. Abbott, Thorp, Reed & Armstrong, Pittsburgh, for appellant.
    Carl A. Eck, Maria Zulick, Meyer, Darragh, Buckler, Bebenek & Eck, Pittsburgh, for Bishop James Hogan, Monsignor Thomas Madden, Monsignor Roy F. Kline, Monsignor Paul Panza, Monsignor Ignatius Wadas, Diocese of Altoona-Johnstown, and St. Mary’s Catholic Church.
    Richard M. Serbin, Joseph Nypaver, Levin, Reese & Serbin, Altoona, for Samuel C. Hutchison.
    John P. O’Dea, Stradley, Ronon, Stevens & Young, Philadelphia, for Cardinal John Krol and Arch-Diocese of Philadelphia.
    L. Edward Glass, Johnstown, for Father Francis Luddy.
    Before NIX, C.J., and LARSEN, FLAHERTY, McDERMOTT, ZAPPALA, PAPADAKOS and CAPPY, JJ., concurring.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM:

This appeal is dismissed as moot.

McDERMOTT, J., did not participate in the decision of this case.

NIX, C.J., files a concurring statement.

NIX, Chief Justice,

concurring.

I join the Per Curiam Order dismissing the appeal as moot. My initial inclination in this case was to vacate the Superior Court’s order and remand the matter to the Court of Common Pleas for an initial determination of the Appellant’s right to intervene. However, because the case has been discontinued in the Court of Common Pleas, there is no controversy in which that court could issue a ruling. Therefore, it is moot.  