Appeal, No. 33, May T., 1954, from order of Court of Common Pleas of Dauphin County, No. 208, Commonwealth Docket, 1951, in case of William H. Beard, Inc. v. State Board of Undertakers et al. Appeal quashed. Appeal by licensee from decision of the Pennsylvania State Board of Undertakers revoking corporate undertaking license. Order entered sustaining decision of board, opinion by KREIDER, J. Licensee appealed; motion of Commonwealth filed to quash appeal.
Jacob S. Richman, with him Richman & Richman, for appellant.
Sklar & Pearl, for intervenor, appellant.
Elmer T. Bolla, Deputy Attorney General, with him Herbert B. Cohen, Attorney General, and Abraham J. Levy, for appellee.
Before Jones, Bell, Chidsey, Musmanno and Arnold, JJ.
OPINION BY MR. JUSTICE JONES
On March 21, 1951, the State Board of Undertakers issued a citation directed to William H. Beard, Inc., at the corporation's place of business in Philadelphia, calling on it to appear at a hearing on April 11, 1951, in Philadelphia and show cause why its undertaker's license should not be suspended or revoked for alleged violations of specified provisions of cited statutes, relating to the undertaking business and to the public
health, and a certain regulation of the Board theretofore adopted and promulgated pursuant to statutory authority. Specifically, the citation charged the respondent with having conducted its undertaking business without the services of a properly registered supervisor, without permitting a registered licensed supervisor to actually supervise its undertaking business, in having negligently and incompetently carried on its undertaking business by having caused burial permits to be issued through the illegal, unauthorized and improper use of the name of an undertaker in good standing with the Board but not registered in, or in any way connected with, the respondent's undertaking business and in conducting its undertaking business in violation of the health laws of the Commonwealth.
Pursuant to the citation and notice, hearings were duly held on various dates at which a stenographic record of the proceedings was made. The respondent was represented by counsel throughout. In due course, the Board made findings of fact on the basis of the testimony and exhibits introduced at the various hearings and concluded as a matter of law that the respondent had violated the undertakers law and the regulation of the Board in the manner in which it had conducted its undertaking business. The Board accordingly entered an order on August 14, 1951, revoking the respondent's license from which order the respondent appealed to the Court of Common Pleas of Dauphin County on September 7, 1951. After argument thereon, the Dauphin County court entered an order, on December 14, 1953, sustaining the action of the Board. The respondent took the instant appeal on January 30, 1954; and certiorari issued on February 5, 1954.
The Commonwealth has moved to quash the appeal, principally, on the ground ...