528 A.2d 1074
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania.Argued February 25, 1987.
July 27, 1987.
Argued February 25, 1987, before President Judge CRUMLISH, JR., judges CRAIG, MacPHAIL, DOYLE, BARRY, COLINS and PALLADINO.
Original Jurisdiction, No. 101 C.D. 1981, in case of Francis J. Catania, et al. v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, State Employees’ Retirement Board and Robert L. Cusma, in his capacity as Secretary of the State Employees’ Retirement System and R. Budd Dwyer, in his capacity as Treasurer of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
Complaint in mandamus and for declaratory judgment in the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania seeking recalculation of retirement benefits. Plenary jurisdiction accepted by Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. Summary judgment granted three plaintiffs. Case returned to Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania. Motion for summary judgment of plaintiffs granted. (71 Pa. Commw. 393) Petition in the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania for enforcement of payment of benefits pursuant to consent decree executed previously. Preliminary objections filed by State Employees’ Retirement Board. Held: Preliminary objections sustained. Action dismissed.
Page 47
Richard B. Klein, with him, Henry T. Reath and Judith N. Renzulli, Duane, Morris Heckscher, for plaintiffs.
Mary Beth Christiansen, Deputy Attorney General, with her Susan J. Forney, Senior Deputy Attorney General, Andrew S. Gordon, Chief Deputy Attorney General, Chief, Litigation Section, and LeRoy S. Zimmerman, Attorney General, for defendants.
OPINION BY JUDGE BARRY, July 27, 1987:
Richard B. Klein has filed a petition for enforcement under this Court’s original jurisdiction. 42 Pa. C. S. § 761. He maintains that the State Employees’ Retirement Board has unlawfully refused to grant him certain benefits he is entitled to receive pursuant to a consent decree entered into by members of the class in the case of Catania v. State Employees’ Retirement Board, 71 Pa. Commw. 393, 455 A.2d 1250
(1983).
The Board has filed preliminary objections maintaining that this Court lacks original jurisdiction in this matter because Klein has filed an appeal from the Board’s decision on this exact issue and that appeal is properly within our appellate jurisdiction. 42 Pa. C. S. § 763.
Because we have addressed the same issues in Klein’s appeal from the Board’s adjudication, at Klein v. State Employees’ Retirement Board, 108 Pa. Commw. 39, 528 A.2d 1071
(1987), which case is dispositive of the present action, we sustain the Board’s preliminary objections.
ORDER
NOW, July 27, 1987, the preliminary objections of the State Employees’ Retirement Board are sustained and the above action is dismissed.
Page 48
Judge MacPHAIL did not participate in the decision in this case.
Judge DOYLE concurs in the result only.