Categories: Pennsylvania Supreme Court Opinions

PHILADELPHIA v. PHILADELPHIA PARKING AUTH., 566 Pa. 230 (2001)

780 A.2d 601

THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA, PETITIONER, v. THE PHILADELPHIA PARKING AUTHORITY, JOSEPH T. ASHDALE, MICHAEL A. CIBIK, CATHERINE MARSHALL, ALFRED W. TAUBENBERGER, RUSSELL R. WAGNER, KAREN M. WRIGLEY, RESPONDENTS.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Eastern District.
July 31, 2001.

No. 28 EAP 2001, Emergency Application for Stay, Petition for King’s Bench, and Appeal from the Order of the Commonwealth Court (Doyle) dated July 20, 2001 at No. 343 M.D. 2001.

ORDER
PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 1st day of August, 2001, the Emergency Application for Stay seeking relief as of July 23, 2001, is hereby DENIED as moot. The Petition for King’s Bench is hereby DENIED.

Page 231

The appeal shall be entertained on an expedited basis and the prothonotary is directed to issue a briefing schedule in accordance therewith. The parties should concentrate their argument on the question of whether the Commonwealth Court had original jurisdiction to entertain this action. Further implementation of Act 22 of 2001 is stayed pending resolution of this appeal.

Justices NEWMAN and SAYLOR dissent from that portion of the order staying further implementation of Act 22 of 2001 pending the resolution of the appeal.

jdjungle