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.

WILLIAM J. ROPER v. BOROUGH VERSAILLES (11/12/81)

decided: November 12, 1981.

WILLIAM J. ROPER, APPELLANT
v.
BOROUGH OF VERSAILLES, APPELLEE



Appeal from the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County in case of William J. Roper v. Borough of Versailles, No. SA 822 of 1980.

COUNSEL

John A. Bacharach, Girman & Bacharach, for appellant.

Arnold V. Plum, for appellee.

President Judge Crumlish, Jr. and Judges Rogers and Blatt, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by President Judge Crumlish.

Author: Crumlish

[ 62 Pa. Commw. Page 338]

William J. Roper appeals an Allegheny County Common Pleas Court order upholding his employment termination as a part-time police officer by the Borough of Versailles. We affirm.

On January 7, 1980, the Versailles Borough Council passed and recorded this resolution:

[T]o nominate the retention of all existing part-time police, subject to the condition [that] they continue employment with the Versailles Borough police department alone.

On January 17, 1980, Roper was informed by the Chairman of the Police Committee and Versailles's Chief of Police of the Council action.*fn1 Roper, however, continued in the employ of Lincoln Borough as a part-time police officer and was notified in writing by the Police Committee Chairman that he was through in Versailles.

Roper contends that the resolution on its face barred all outside employment of the Borough's part-time

[ 62 Pa. Commw. Page 339]

    police officers, and therefore asserts that the application of the resolution against him is discriminatory since other part-time policemen employed by Versailles were not dismissed although they maintained other non-municipal employment.*fn2

As always, we are called upon to ascertain and effectuate the intent of the legislative body to obtain a result which is neither absurd nor unreasonable. Valley Forge Industries, Inc. v. Ormand Construction, Inc., 38 ...


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.