Bonnie Brigance Leadbetter

This case involved a dispute between Allegheny County and the Deputy Sheriff's Association over whether the County violated their collective bargaining agreement (CBA) by deducting payroll taxes from healthcare reimbursements paid directly to retirees for private insurance, rather than treating the payments as non-taxable under IRS rules. An arbitrator sustained the union's grievance after finding that the tax treatment violated the CBA's reimbursement provision and that the claim was timely as a continuing violation, but the trial court vacated the award on grounds that the arbitrator exceeded her authority by adding a missing term to the CBA. The Commonwealth Court reversed the trial court, concluding that the arbitrator acted within the scope of her authority under the CBA's grievance procedures and that deference to the arbitration award was required.

labor & employmenttaxeshealthcare

The case involved Darret Goldwire petitioning for review of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review's order affirming the dismissal of his appeal from a February 2024 monetary determination granting him unemployment benefits at a weekly rate of $241. The court affirmed the Board's decision, holding that Goldwire's March 5, 2024 electronic appeal was filed six days after the 21-day deadline under Section 501(e) of the Unemployment Compensation Law and that he had not established grounds for nunc pro tunc relief. The core reasoning was that the statutory time limit is mandatory and jurisdictional once expired, Goldwire received the determination but chose not to review it based on his own assumption of correctness, and there was no evidence of fraud, administrative breakdown, or non-negligent circumstances beyond his control.

labor & employmentprocedure

The case concerned Adam Ehrlich's appeal from a trial court order denying his petition for judicial review of the Philadelphia Police Department's refusal to release certain bodycam video recordings requested under Act 22 of 2017. The requests pertained to police interactions on August 1 and 2, 2023, at properties linked to prior code enforcement litigation, during which Ehrlich was arrested; the Department denied access on grounds that the recordings contained investigative information protected under Act 22 and the Criminal History Record Information Act. Ehrlich argued the recordings were needed to investigate potential civil rights violations and for use in civil litigation, but the trial court upheld the denial. On appeal, the Commonwealth Court affirmed the trial court's decision, adopting its reasoning and noting that some recordings had been produced in related litigation and that certain arguments, such as the need for in camera review, had been waived.

criminal lawprocedurecivil rights

The case involved Yousuf Ghafoori's appeal from a zoning violation notice and denial of a certificate of non-conformance for his use of a property in Hamilton Township's C zoning district as a short-term rental. Ghafoori had purchased the property, converted its garage into an indoor pool without permits, and began renting it out via platforms like Airbnb before the township adopted an ordinance restricting short-term rentals to a different district. The Zoning Hearing Board denied relief after finding that Ghafoori's use was not lawful prior to the ordinance because he failed to obtain required zoning permits and certificates of occupancy under the township's Zoning Ordinance. The Court of Common Pleas dismissed his appeal, and the Commonwealth Court affirmed, holding that noncompliance with permitting requirements rendered the preexisting use unlawful and ineligible for protection as a nonconforming use. The court also upheld the violation findings related to the unpermitted pool installation.

propertybusiness & regulatory

The case involves claimant Carleton Holman, a teacher injured at work in 2017, who received temporary wage-loss benefits from the School District of Philadelphia before the employer issued a medical-only notice of compensation payable and ceased indemnity payments. After an earlier penalty petition was denied, Holman filed a reinstatement petition seeking renewed benefits, but both the workers' compensation judge and the Appeal Board dismissed it as untimely. The Commonwealth Court affirmed, holding that the petition was barred by the three-year statute of limitations under Section 413(a) of the Workers' Compensation Act, which runs from the date of the most recent compensation payment; the court followed precedent excluding payments later reversed on appeal from restarting that period.

labor & employmentprocedure

The case involved a requester who filed Right-to-Know Law requests with the City of Philadelphia for records related to its contract with vendor NGP VAN; after the Office of Open Records directed the City to obtain certain responsive records from the vendor, the City initially failed to do so within the required timeframe. The requester then brought a mandamus action in the Court of Common Pleas seeking compliance and fees for alleged bad faith. The trial court granted the City's motion for judgment on the pleadings, finding the action moot because the City had complied and submitted a credible affidavit confirming production of the records. The Commonwealth Court affirmed, holding that the trial court properly accepted the City's evidence of compliance, that no bad faith was shown, and that the court did not abuse its discretion in denying further discovery.

procedure

The case involved Phi Duong's petition for review of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review's denial of Mixed Earner Unemployment Compensation (MEUC) benefits under the CARES Act. The court affirmed the Board's decision, finding that Duong was ineligible because he had not established the required $5,000 in self-employment income from the prior year. The core reasoning was based on Duong's own testimony during the hearing that he was not self-employed in 2019 but instead worked for an employer as a dishwasher, which failed to meet the statutory criteria for the additional MEUC payments.

labor & employment

In this case, claimant Debra Krigar sought review of Unemployment Compensation Board of Review orders that dismissed her appeals from seven 2021-2022 UC service center determinations finding her ineligible for benefits, assessing fraud overpayments and penalties, and denying backdating of claims. The referee had dismissed four appeals as untimely under Section 501(e) of the Unemployment Compensation Law because they were filed after the stated deadlines, and denied the remaining claims on the merits due to lack of evidence from the claimant; the Board later dismissed all appeals to it as untimely when they were filed in April 2024. The Commonwealth Court affirmed, holding that the appeals were filed well after the applicable deadlines, that the claimant failed to demonstrate good cause or an administrative breakdown that would excuse the delays, and that any prior hearing notice issues did not affect the obligation to file timely appeals from the referee's decisions.

labor & employmentprocedure

The case involved an inmate, Glavin Ivy, who filed a petition in the Commonwealth Court's original jurisdiction seeking return of $1,262.52 deducted from a $3,000 settlement he received in a federal civil rights lawsuit against correctional officers. The Pennsylvania Department of Corrections made the deductions under Section 6608 of the Prison Litigation Reform Act to satisfy outstanding court costs, fines, and restitution from Ivy's underlying criminal case in Mercer County. Ivy argued that the statute did not apply to private settlements or federal court cases, that Department policy limited deductions to 50% of the total, and that the provision unconstitutionally intruded on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's rulemaking authority. The court sustained the respondents' preliminary objections in the nature of a demurrer and dismissed the petition, concluding that Section 6608 authorizes deductions from any monetary settlement in prison conditions litigation filed in federal or state court and does not regulate court procedures.

criminal lawcivil rightsprocedure

The case involved claimant Laura Dittman, who was terminated from her remote position at S & T Bank after moving from Pennsylvania to Colorado without prior notification to the employer's compensation and benefits department, as required by the bank's telework agreement that remote employees signed annually. Dittman applied for unemployment compensation benefits, which were denied by the service center and referee on grounds of willful misconduct under Section 402(e) of the Unemployment Compensation Law; the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review affirmed, crediting employer testimony that the policy existed to address state-specific tax and labor law obligations. The Commonwealth Court affirmed the Board's decision, holding that the policy was reasonable, that Dittman was aware of it, and that she failed to show good cause for the violation or that the stated reason for termination was pretextual despite language in a severance agreement. The court found the employer's witnesses credible regarding the policy's enforcement and the reason for discharge.

labor & employment

Sean Donahue petitioned for review of the State Civil Service Commission's order denying his request for a hearing and dismissing his appeal. The case concerned Donahue's claims that the Department of Human Services discriminated against him in hiring for Income Maintenance Caseworker positions based on political opinions, religious opinions, national origin, age, and by misusing a bilingual language requirement to circumvent veterans' preference, with requests for backpay dating to 2006. The court affirmed the Commission's decision, holding that the appeal was untimely under the 20-day deadline of the Civil Service Reform Act and that Donahue's allegations were insufficient to state a discrimination claim. The court noted that the Commission may dismiss an appeal without a hearing if the form fails to state a proper claim, despite statutory language requiring a hearing upon receipt of an appeal.

labor & employmentcivil rightsprocedure

In this case, Andre D. Butler sued the Philadelphia Parking Authority under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 after the Authority booted, towed, and auctioned a 1986 Ford Mustang due to unpaid parking tickets, alleging a violation of his due process rights regarding the vehicle's impoundment and sale. The trial court denied Butler's motions for summary judgment, entered a judgment of non pros after he failed to appear for trial, and denied his petition to open that judgment. The Commonwealth Court affirmed, holding that genuine issues of material fact remained on key points such as vehicle ownership, the adequacy of notice before the auction, and whether Butler properly contested the actions, precluding summary judgment. The court also upheld the procedural rulings on the non pros and related orders as the appeal was properly before it from the final order.

civil rightspropertyprocedure

This case involved an appeal by Protect PT and resident Patricia R. Wendell challenging the trial court's affirmance of Penn Township's approval of a revised land development plan for EQT Artemis Production's unconventional natural gas well pad, known as the Aphrodite Well Pad. After an initial special exception and land development approval, the well pad site was shifted approximately 178 feet due to a newly discovered stream, leading to an amended erosion permit from DEP and a revised township approval that imposed the original conditions without requiring new zoning review. The Commonwealth Court affirmed, holding that the objectors lacked standing, the site adjustment was de minimis and did not necessitate restarting the zoning process or additional public hearings under the SALDO, and there were no violations of notice requirements or the Sunshine Act.

environmentbusiness & regulatoryprocedure

The case concerned whether Downs Racing, L.P., operating Mohegan Sun Pocono, owed Luzerne County's 5% hotel room rental tax on complimentary rooms given to patrons under the Third Class County Convention Center Authority Act and the county's Ordinance and Regulations. Luzerne County appealed the trial court's grant of summary judgment to Mohegan. The Commonwealth Court affirmed, holding that the tax applies only to consideration received from room rentals to transients, and no consideration was received for the complimentary rooms. The court rejected Luzerne's expert report as improperly addressing a legal question of what constitutes consideration and found that the plain language of the Act and Regulations supported Mohegan's position that such rooms were not taxable.

taxesbusiness & regulatory

This case involved David Maiella, a former police officer for the City of New Castle, who sought a disability retirement benefit under the City's Police Pension Plan after a back injury led to his separation from employment in 2021. The Pension Board denied his claim without a hearing in March 2022, relying on medical reports, after which Maiella pursued a grievance under the collective bargaining agreement rather than an immediate appeal under the Plan's 90-day procedure; an arbitrator later ruled the matter non-arbitrable, prompting Maiella's December 2022 statutory appeal, which the Board rejected as untimely. The trial court found the appeal timely and reversed the denial after ordering an additional medical evaluation, but the Commonwealth Court affirmed only the timeliness ruling while vacating the reversal. The court reasoned that Maiella had preserved his appeal rights under the Plan while grieving, making the submission timely, but the Board had failed to conduct the required full review and hearing under Plan Section 169.09(g) due to the timeliness dispute, necessitating a remand for that process.

labor & employmentprocedure

This case involves Quran Cooper, a parolee recommitted as a convicted parole violator after new convictions including firearm possession, who petitioned for review of the Pennsylvania Parole Board's denial of credit for time spent at liberty on parole and the resulting recomputed maximum sentence date. His appointed counsel, Dana E. Greenspan, sought to withdraw representation by filing a no-merit letter asserting that the petition lacked merit. The court granted the withdrawal application after confirming counsel met all procedural requirements for withdrawal and independently reviewed the claims. The court found no abuse of discretion by the Board, as it had authority to deny credit due to the new weapon-related offense and the backtime imposed was within applicable guidelines and tied to the original sentence.

criminal lawprocedure

This case involved a challenge by Concerned Residents of West Deer and individual appellants to the Township of West Deer's Board of Supervisors' approval of conditional use and land development applications submitted by EQT Artemis Midstream for construction and operation of a natural gas interconnect facility and pipeline in a Special Use zoning district. The Board granted the applications subject to 30 conditions after public hearings, finding the project met the zoning ordinance definition of oil and gas development and that objectors failed to rebut the presumption of consistency with public health, safety, and welfare. The Court of Common Pleas affirmed, and the Commonwealth Court likewise affirmed, holding that the Board correctly interpreted the ordinance, credited the applicant's evidence over objectors' concerns, properly addressed application completeness and evidentiary issues such as compliance history and notices of violation, and that any procedural errors were harmless. The court concluded the approvals were properly granted under Pennsylvania land use law.

environmentpropertybusiness & regulatory

The case involves JUNS, Inc. appealing the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board's denial of renewal for its Eating Place Retail Dispenser (Malt) license, which was based on allegations of improper conduct, the licensee's manager not being a person of good repute, and insufficient seating at the premises. After a hearing examiner recommended renewal and the trial court affirmed the Board's denial following de novo review that included police reports of criminal activity, the Commonwealth Court vacated the trial court's order. The court remanded for essential findings of fact and conclusions of law based on the existing record within 90 days, focusing on the proper admission and consideration of police reports as business records under the hearsay exception.

business & regulatorycriminal lawprocedure

The case involved police officer Steve Russo, who filed a claim petition for wage loss benefits and a review petition to expand his accepted work injuries to include PTSD, depression, and a right elbow injury after a violent on-duty struggle with a suspect on November 20, 2020. The Workers' Compensation Judge denied both petitions, finding insufficient evidence of work-related disability and that the psychological injuries did not meet applicable burdens of proof, and the Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board affirmed. The Commonwealth Court reversed, concluding that the WCJ relied on factual determinations unsupported by the record, which rendered the decision unreasonable and unjust under the Workers’ Compensation Act. The opinion discussed distinctions between physical/mental and mental/mental claims for psychological injuries but rested its holding on the lack of evidentiary support rather than reinterpreting the Act's standards.

labor & employment

The case involves a negligence lawsuit filed by Angelina Matos on behalf of her minor child S.M., an autistic student at Mastery Charter School, who was allegedly sexually and physically abused by bus driver Charles Johnson over several weeks in 2022. Johnson had been hired by transportation contractor RM Knox despite a lengthy criminal record, and the District and Charter School allegedly failed to obtain or review required background checks before allowing him to transport students. The District and Charter School appealed the trial court's overruling of their preliminary objections, claiming immunity under the Political Subdivision Tort Claims Act since Johnson was not their direct employee. The Commonwealth Court affirmed the trial court's orders, ruling that the sexual abuse exception to immunity applies because the schools' alleged negligence in screening and supervising the driver enabled the harm, following the precedent in L.F.V. v. South Philadelphia High School.

torts & liabilityprocedure