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.

CITY PITTSBURGH AND PAUL J. IMHOFF v. COMMONWEALTH PENNSYLVANIA (07/11/75)

decided: July 11, 1975.

CITY OF PITTSBURGH AND PAUL J. IMHOFF, SUPERINTENDENT OF THE BUREAU OF BUILDING INSPECTION OF THE CITY OF PITTSBURGH, PLAINTIFFS, AND JUNE B. COHEN, INTERVENING PLAINTIFF,
v.
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, ISRAEL PACKEL, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA; JOSEPH A. PAUZA, REGIONAL DIRECTOR OF THE BUREAU OF CORRECTION; LOUIS J. HARVEY; ETHEL HARVEY; E. LOUIS AVERBACH AND EDITH S. AVERBACH, DEFENDANTS



Original jurisdiction in case of City of Pittsburgh and Paul J. Imhoff, Superintendent of the Bureau of Building Inspection of the City of Pittsburgh, Plaintiffs, and June B. Cohen, Intervening Plaintiff, v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Israel Packel, Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania; Joseph A. Pauza, Regional Director of the Bureau of Correction; Louis J. Harvey; Ethel Harvey; E. Louis Averbach and Edith S. Averbach, Defendants.

COUNSEL

Eugene B. Strassburger, III, Deputy City Solicitor, with him Mead J. Mulvihill, Jr., City Solicitor, for plaintiffs.

Harvey W. Daniels, for intervening plaintiff.

Janet Moschetta, Assistant Attorney General, with her Robert P. Kane, Attorney General, for defendants.

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

Author: Rogers

[ 20 Pa. Commw. Page 227]

The plaintiffs and the intervening plaintiff sought an order enjoining the defendants from establishing a prison pre-release center at 535 South Aiken Avenue,

[ 20 Pa. Commw. Page 228]

Pittsburgh. The grounds upon which the relief was sought were (1) that the defendants have failed to seek or obtain a certificate of occupancy from the zoning authorities of the City of Pittsburgh, and (2) that the Governor had not approved the location as required by Section 1 of the Act of July 16, 1968, P.L. 351, 61 P.S. ยง 1051 (Supp. 1974-1975).

The statute in question is as follows:

"The Bureau of Correction, Department of Justice, shall have the power and its duty shall be to establish with the approval of the Governor such prisoner pre-release centers at such locations throughout the Commonwealth as it may deem necessary to carry out effective prisoner pre-release programs therefrom."

The plaintiffs sought a preliminary injunction which, after hearing, we granted on August 6, 1974, on the ground that it appeared to us that the Governor had not approved the location as a pre-release center.

The public defendants moved to dissolve the preliminary injunction on the ground that they were able to prove gubernatorial approval. After hearing at which there was admitted a letter from the Governor to the Commissioner of the Bureau of Correction approving the Aiken Street property for use as a pre-release center, we entered ...


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.