Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

JOHN V. ANGEL v. COMMONWEALTH PENNSYLVANIA (08/22/73)

decided: August 22, 1973.

JOHN V. ANGEL, APPELLANT,
v.
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, STATE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, APPELLEE



Appeal from the Order of the State Civil Service Commission, in case of Appeal of John V. Angel, No. 1343.

COUNSEL

Thomas E. Lippard, with him Houston, Cooper, Speer & German, for appellant.

Craig T. Stockdale, Assistant Solicitor, with him Francis A. Barry, Solicitor, for appellee.

President Judge Bowman and Judges Crumlish, Jr., Kramer, Wilkinson, Jr., Mencer, Rogers and Blatt. Opinion by Judge Crumlish, Jr.

Author: Crumlish

[ 9 Pa. Commw. Page 583]

This is an appeal from a decision of the State Civil Service Commission dismissing Appellant's contentions that his "furlough" from the Allegheny County Health Department did not comport with Civil Service Regulations, and was based on discriminatory motivations.

Since 1966, Appellant John V. Angel was employed as, and has since been, the only draftsman in the Allegheny County Health Department, Bureau of Air Pollution.

By a letter dated June 27, 1972, Appellant was notified that due to "insufficient work for a full-time draftsman" with the Health Department's Bureau of Air Pollution, he was being placed on furlough.

On July 21, 1972, Appellant appealed the action of the Department of Health to the State Civil Service Commission,*fn1 alleging that his relegation to furlough status was improper and was in fact discriminatory.

By Order dated November 8, 1972, the Civil Service Commission held that the Director of the Allegheny County Department of Health acted in accordance with Civil Service Regulations when he put Appellant on furlough and that discrimination was not a factor in the decision.

Appellant, coming to this Court, contends that essential findings of fact made by the Commission were not supported by substantial evidence, and for this reason, the Commission erred in its conclusion.

[ 9 Pa. Commw. Page 584]

We disagree and affirm the State Civil ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.