APPEAL
======
This appeal comprises three separate issues:
1) Whether the Superior Court erred in according
to the Board statutory authority to prohibit do-it-yourself
plumbing.
2) Whether the Superior Court erred in adjudicating this
controversy in the absence of any and all legally valid evidence.
3) Whether the Superior Court erred in entertaining and allowing
a Cross-Motion from an entity that was not legally a party to
the action; and whether the Superior Court erred in imputing to
the defendant the State Plumbing Board concurrence in a motion
where such concurrence is not documented in the record, and where
the State Plumbing Board had failed to oppose the Do-It-Yourself
plumber's motions.
These three issues have as their common denominator to what extent,
if at all the Commonwealth has sovereign immunity for conduct 
proscribed to its citizens.