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.

BABCOCK SCHOOL DISTRICT v. JAMES EDWARD POTOCKI AND DIANE LINDA POTOCKI (02/01/83)

decided: February 1, 1983.

BABCOCK SCHOOL DISTRICT, APPELLANT
v.
JAMES EDWARD POTOCKI AND DIANE LINDA POTOCKI, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS PARENTS AND NATURAL GUARDIANS OF TIMOTHY JAMES POTOCKI, APPELLEES



Appeal from the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County in the case of James Edward Potocki and Diane Linda Potocki, individually and as parents and natural guardians of Timothy James Potocki v. Babcock School District, No. GD 81-22985.

COUNSEL

Lee A. Donaldson, Jr., Donaldson & Donaldson, for appellant.

John R. Orie, Jr., for appellees.

William Fearen, with him Michael I. Levin, Cleckner and Fearen, for Amicus Curiae, the Pennsylvania School Boards Association.

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

Author: Crumlish

[ 71 Pa. Commw. Page 505]

Babcock School District appeals an Allegheny County Common Pleas Court order dismissing the

[ 71 Pa. Commw. Page 506]

School District's petition to open a peremptory judgment in mandamus.*fn1 We affirm.

The Potockis, Babcock School District residents, transferred their child to a public school in a neighboring district. Later their request to the District to provide their son with free transportation to and from the new school was denied. They then sought relief in mandamus. Next followed a motion for peremptory judgment under Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1098*fn2 which, after hearing, was granted. The School District's petition to open the judgment was dismissed.

Where a party appeals a denial of its petition to open a peremptory judgment, our scope of review is limited to determining whether the trial court abused its discretion. See, e.g., Lened Homes, Inc. v. Department of Licenses and Inspections of the City of Philadelphia,

[ 71 Pa. Commw. Page 507386]

Pa. 50, 123 A.2d 406 (1956); City of Greensburg v. Cooper, 14 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 419, 322 A.2d 152 (1974). An abuse of discretion will be found only where the party has met his burden of showing good cause for ...


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.