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.

COMMONWEALTH PENNSYLVANIA v. BOROUGH EAST WASHINGTON (10/07/77)

decided: October 7, 1977.

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, AUDITOR GENERAL OF PENNSYLVANIA, APPELLANT,
v.
BOROUGH OF EAST WASHINGTON



COUNSEL

Frank A. Woelfling, Deputy Counsel, Frank P. Lawley, Jr., Chief Counsel, Dept. of Auditor Gen., Ronald M. Chesin, Harrisburg, for appellant.

James C. McCreight, Clarence A. Crumrine, McCreight, Marriner & McCreight, Washington, for appellee.

Eagen, C. J., and O'Brien, Roberts, Pomeroy, Nix and Manderino, JJ.

Author: Roberts

[ 474 Pa. Page 227]

OPINION OF THE COURT

In this interlocutory appeal, the Auditor General of Pennsylvania challenges the jurisdiction of the Commonwealth Court to hear an action brought by the Borough of East Washington. The Borough sought review in the Commonwealth Court of the Auditor General's determination that certain future Commonwealth allocations should be withheld from the Borough. We hold that the Commonwealth Court has jurisdiction to hear this case.

[ 474 Pa. Page 228]

I

Section 403 of the Fiscal Code of 1929*fn1 requires the Auditor General to audit the accounts and records of every recipient of money payable from the State Treasury to ensure that the money is expended for proper purposes. If the money is not expended properly, the Auditor General is empowered to decline to approve any further requisitions for payment to the recipient until the amount improperly expended "shall have been expended for the purpose for which the money improperly expended was received from the State Treasury."*fn2

Pursuant to section 403, the Auditor General examined the books of account and records of the Police Pension Fund of the Borough of East Washington, and determined that certain improper expenditures had been made from the Police Pension Fund.*fn3 Therefore, on June 5, 1975, the

[ 474 Pa. Page 229]

Auditor General recommended the withholding of further state allocations*fn4 until the Police Pension Fund is reimbursed for the improper expenditures.

The Borough alleged that the Auditor General's action was an adjudication within the meaning of the Administrative Agency Law, Act of June 4, 1945, P.L. 1388, §§ 1 et seq., as amended, 71 P.S. §§ 1710.1 et seq. (1962), and was therefore appealable to the Commonwealth Court. The Borough filedd its appeal on June 30, 1975. The Auditor General filed a motion to quash, and on ...


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.