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.

REGINALD D. PLATO v. CITY PITTSBURGH (01/28/83)

decided: January 28, 1983.

REGINALD D. PLATO, APPELLANT
v.
CITY OF PITTSBURGH, APPELLEE



Appeal from the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County in the case of Reginald D. Plato v. City of Pittsburgh, No. GD 81-08438.

COUNSEL

Reginald D. Plato, appellant, for himself.

D. R. Pellegrini, City Solicitor, with him Cynthia M. Danel, Assistant City Solicitor, for appellee.

Judges Rogers, Blatt and Craig, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Blatt.

Author: Blatt

[ 71 Pa. Commw. Page 464]

Reginald D. Plato, a pro se appellant, appeals here from an order of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County which denied his request that the City of Pittsburgh (City) provide him certain documents and be prohibited from destroying the same.

Before the court of common pleas, Plato styled his action as a petition for a preliminary injunction, and at a hearing held thereon where no evidence was presented, both parties agreed that arrangements would be made for Plato to have access to the requested documents provided that he would more definitely state the allegations contained in paragraph eight of his complaint so that the City would be able to prepare a defense which might be required later. The court then directed that the appellant would have 24 hours to provide the City with such further information; specifically, the identity of the testing laboratory referred to in his complaint which conducted asphalt core-sample tests on City streets.*fn1 Plato failed to appear or to produce this information within the 24 hour limit, and the court by order dated June 30, 1981 dismissed his petition for a preliminary injunction. On July 16, 1981, Plato filed exceptions to the aforementioned order.

The City contends that Plato's appeal should be dismissed for his failure to file exceptions within the

[ 71 Pa. Commw. Page 465]

    ten day period required by Pa. R.C.P. No. 1518 which provides as follows:

Exceptions

Within ten (10) days after notice of the filing of the adjudication exceptions may be filed by any party to rulings on objections to evidence, to statements or finding of fact, to conclusions of law, to the decree nisi or in cases where requests for findings of fact or conclusions of law have been submitted by leave of court to a failure or refusal to find any matter of fact or law substantially as requested. Each exception shall set forth a separate objection precisely and without discussion. Matters not covered by exceptions are deemed waived, unless, prior to final decree, leave is granted to file exceptions raising these matters.

In Greenwood Township v. Kefo, Inc., 52 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 367, 416 A.2d 583 (1980), we addressed a similar situation where an appellee sought to quash a Township's appeal for failure to file exceptions to the ...


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.