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.

MATTER REVOCATION RETAIL DISPENSER EATING PLACE LICENSE NO. E-4797 AND SUNDAY SALES PERMIT NO. SS-4797 (11/09/83)

decided: November 9, 1983.

IN THE MATTER OF REVOCATION OF RETAIL DISPENSER EATING PLACE LICENSE NO. E-4797 AND SUNDAY SALES PERMIT NO. SS-4797, ISSUED TO MARIANO W. DINARDI AND ESTATE OF JOHN B. DINARDI, MADELINE DINARDI, EXECUTRIX. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, PENNSYLVANIA LIQUOR CONTROL BOARD, APPELLANT


Appeal from the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Huntingdon County in case of In the Matter of the Revocation of Retail Dispenser Eating Place License, No. E-4797 and Sunday Sales Permit No. SS-4797, issued to Mariano W. Dinardi and Estate of John B. Dinardi, Madeline Dinardi, Executrix, No. 82-1062.

COUNSEL

Felix Thau, Assistant Counsel, with him, Gary F. Di Vito, Chief Counsel, for appellant.

John J. Dirienzo, Jr., Fike, Cascio and Boose, P.C., with him, Harvey B. Reeder, for appellees.

Judge Craig. Memorandum Opinion by Judge Craig.

Author: Craig

[ 84 Pa. Commw. Page 599]

The Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board (LCB) appealed from an order of the Court of Common Pleas of Huntingdon County which reversed a LCB revocation of a retail license. The Dinardis, the licensees, have moved to quash the appeal on the ground that the LCB was untimely in filing it.

As revealed by the docket entries, produced in response to an earlier order of this court, the LCB filed its notice of appeal to this court on August 18, 1983. That appeal was from trial court's reversal action, embodied in two orders, both dated May 6, 1983. Apparently, the trial judge also orally delivered his reversal order from the bench on May 6, 1983. However, under Pa. R.A.P. 301(a):

No order of a court shall be appealable until it has been entered upon the appropriate docket in the lower court.

Also, subparagraph (c) of the same Rule of Appellate Procedure provides:

A direction by the lower court that a specified judgment, sentence or other order shall be

[ 84 Pa. Commw. Page 600]

    entered, unaccompanied by actual entry of the specified order in the docket . . . does not constitute an appealable order. Any such order shall be reduced to judgment and docketed before an appeal is taken.

Therefore, under Pa. R.A.P. 903(a), the thirty-day appeal period from "the entry of the order" did not commence to run from May 6, 1983 because no docket entry was then made nor did any party file a praecipe to reduce a bench ...


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.